東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Supreme courts under pressure = cont...

Bravo-Hurtado, Pablo.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Supreme courts under pressure = controlling caseload in the administration of civil justice /

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Supreme courts under pressure/ edited by Pablo Bravo-Hurtado, Cornelis Hendrik van Rhee.
其他題名:	controlling caseload in the administration of civil justice /
其他作者:	Bravo-Hurtado, Pablo.
出版者:	Cham :Springer International Publishing : : 2021.,
面頁冊數:	vii, 233 p. :ill., digital ;24 cm.
內容註:	Introduction -- Towards a Reform of the French Court of Cassation? -- Finding a Cure or Simply Relieving Symptoms? The Case of the Italian Supreme Court -- Back in Focus: Case Overload and Case Selection Standards in the Spanish Supreme Court -- Sharing Responsibility: The German Federal Court of Justice and the Civil Appellate System -- Access to the Austrian Oberster Gerichtshof: Attempts to Strike a Balance Between Adequate Workload and Adequate Review -- Croatia: Supreme Court between Individual Justice and System Management -- The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and the Court of Appeal in England and Wales: Sharing the Appellate Load -- A Happy-Go-Lucky Story: The American Supreme Court and Overload Problems -- Case Selection and Writ of Certiorari in Argentina: 'Transcendence' as a Case-Selection Parameter at the Federal Supreme Court.
Contained By:	Springer Nature eBook
標題:	Courts of last resort. -
電子資源:	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63731-6
ISBN:	9783030637316

Supreme courts under pressure = controlling caseload in the administration of civil justice /
Supreme courts under pressurecontrolling caseload in the administration of civil justice /[electronic resource] :edited by Pablo Bravo-Hurtado, Cornelis Hendrik van Rhee. - Cham :Springer International Publishing :2021. - vii, 233 p. :ill., digital ;24 cm. - Ius gentium: comparative perspectives on law and justice,v.831534-6781 ;. - Ius gentium: comparative perspectives on law and justice ;v.83..

Introduction -- Towards a Reform of the French Court of Cassation? -- Finding a Cure or Simply Relieving Symptoms? The Case of the Italian Supreme Court -- Back in Focus: Case Overload and Case Selection Standards in the Spanish Supreme Court -- Sharing Responsibility: The German Federal Court of Justice and the Civil Appellate System -- Access to the Austrian Oberster Gerichtshof: Attempts to Strike a Balance Between Adequate Workload and Adequate Review -- Croatia: Supreme Court between Individual Justice and System Management -- The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and the Court of Appeal in England and Wales: Sharing the Appellate Load -- A Happy-Go-Lucky Story: The American Supreme Court and Overload Problems -- Case Selection and Writ of Certiorari in Argentina: 'Transcendence' as a Case-Selection Parameter at the Federal Supreme Court.

This book discusses civil litigation at the supreme courts of nine jurisdictions - Argentina, Austria, Croatia, England and Wales, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United States - and focuses on the available instruments used to keep the caseload of these courts within acceptable limits. Such instruments are necessary in order to allow supreme courts to fulfil their main duties, that is, the administration of justice in individual cases (private function) and providing for the uniformity and development of the law within their respective jurisdictions (public function) If the number of cases at the supreme court level is too high, the result is undue delays, which are mainly problematic with regard to the private function. It may also put the quality of the court's judgments under pressure, which can affect its public and private function alike. Thus, measures aimed at avoiding excessive caseloads need to take both functions into account. Increasing the capacity of the court to handle larger numbers of cases may result in the court being unable to adequately fulfil its public function, since large numbers of court decisions make it difficult to guarantee the uniformity of the law and its development. Therefore, a balanced approach is needed to safeguard capacity and quality. As shown by the contributions gathered here, the nature of reform in this area is not the same everywhere. There are a variety of reasons for this heterogeneity, ranging from different understandings of the caseload problem itself, local conceptions regarding the purpose of the Supreme Court, and strong entitlements concerning the right to appeal to budgetary restrictions and extremely rigid legislation. The book also shows that the implementation of similar solutions to case overload, such as access filters, may have different effects in different jurisdictions. The conclusion might well be that the problem of overburdened courts is multifactorial and context-dependent, and that easy, one-size-fits-all solutions are hard to find and perhaps even harder to implement.

ISBN: 9783030637316

Standard No.: 10.1007/978-3-030-63731-6doiSubjects--Topical Terms:

943316
Courts of last resort.

LC Class. No.: K2123 / .S877 2021

Dewey Class. No.: 347.035

Supreme courts under pressure = controlling caseload in the administration of civil justice /
LDR:04104nmm a2200349 a 4500 001 2239236
003 DE-He213
005 20210714110728.0
006 m d
007 cr nn 008maaau
008 211111s2021 sz s 0 eng d
020 $a 9783030637316 $q (electronic bk.)
020 $a 9783030637309 $q (paper)
024 7 $a 10.1007/978-3-030-63731-6 $2 doi
035 $a 978-3-030-63731-6
040 $a GP $c GP
041 0 $a eng
050 4 $a K2123 $b .S877 2021
072 7 $a LB $2 bicssc
072 7 $a LAW051000 $2 bisacsh
072 7 $a LB $2 thema
072 7 $a LAM $2 thema
082 0 4 $a 347.035 $2 23
090 $a K2123 $b .S959 2021
245 0 0 $a Supreme courts under pressure $h [electronic resource] : $b controlling caseload in the administration of civil justice / $c edited by Pablo Bravo-Hurtado, Cornelis Hendrik van Rhee.
260 $a Cham : $b Springer International Publishing : $b Imprint: Springer, $c 2021.
300 $a vii, 233 p. : $b ill., digital ; $c 24 cm.
490 1 $a Ius gentium: comparative perspectives on law and justice, $x 1534-6781 ; $v v.83
505 0 $a Introduction -- Towards a Reform of the French Court of Cassation? -- Finding a Cure or Simply Relieving Symptoms? The Case of the Italian Supreme Court -- Back in Focus: Case Overload and Case Selection Standards in the Spanish Supreme Court -- Sharing Responsibility: The German Federal Court of Justice and the Civil Appellate System -- Access to the Austrian Oberster Gerichtshof: Attempts to Strike a Balance Between Adequate Workload and Adequate Review -- Croatia: Supreme Court between Individual Justice and System Management -- The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and the Court of Appeal in England and Wales: Sharing the Appellate Load -- A Happy-Go-Lucky Story: The American Supreme Court and Overload Problems -- Case Selection and Writ of Certiorari in Argentina: 'Transcendence' as a Case-Selection Parameter at the Federal Supreme Court.
520 $a This book discusses civil litigation at the supreme courts of nine jurisdictions - Argentina, Austria, Croatia, England and Wales, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United States - and focuses on the available instruments used to keep the caseload of these courts within acceptable limits. Such instruments are necessary in order to allow supreme courts to fulfil their main duties, that is, the administration of justice in individual cases (private function) and providing for the uniformity and development of the law within their respective jurisdictions (public function) If the number of cases at the supreme court level is too high, the result is undue delays, which are mainly problematic with regard to the private function. It may also put the quality of the court's judgments under pressure, which can affect its public and private function alike. Thus, measures aimed at avoiding excessive caseloads need to take both functions into account. Increasing the capacity of the court to handle larger numbers of cases may result in the court being unable to adequately fulfil its public function, since large numbers of court decisions make it difficult to guarantee the uniformity of the law and its development. Therefore, a balanced approach is needed to safeguard capacity and quality. As shown by the contributions gathered here, the nature of reform in this area is not the same everywhere. There are a variety of reasons for this heterogeneity, ranging from different understandings of the caseload problem itself, local conceptions regarding the purpose of the Supreme Court, and strong entitlements concerning the right to appeal to budgetary restrictions and extremely rigid legislation. The book also shows that the implementation of similar solutions to case overload, such as access filters, may have different effects in different jurisdictions. The conclusion might well be that the problem of overburdened courts is multifactorial and context-dependent, and that easy, one-size-fits-all solutions are hard to find and perhaps even harder to implement.
650 0 $a Courts of last resort. $3 943316
650 0 $a Courts of last resort $x Administration. $3 3493074
650 1 4 $a Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. $3 1566062
650 2 4 $a Civil Law. $3 897212
700 1 $a Bravo-Hurtado, Pablo. $3 3493072
700 1 $a Rhee, Cornelis Hendrik van. $3 3221897
710 2 $a SpringerLink (Online service) $3 836513
773 0 $t Springer Nature eBook
830 0 $a Ius gentium: comparative perspectives on law and justice ; $v v.83. $3 3493073
856 4 0 $u https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63731-6
950 $a Law and Criminology (SpringerNature-41177)