Vom Reichshofrat über Cocceji zu PEBB§Y: Epochenübergreifende Überlegungen zu gerichtlichen Urteils- und Vergleichsquoten aus institutionengeschichtlicher Perspektive

Tobias Schenk 1
  • 1 Österreichisches Staatsarchiv, Abteilung Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, A-1010, Wien, Austria
Tobias Schenk
  • Corresponding author
  • Österreichisches Staatsarchiv, Abteilung Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, A-1010, Wien, Austria
  • Email
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar

Abstract

Judicial Decision-Making from the Perspective of Institutional History. A Diachronic Comparison of Court Procedures and Amicable Settlements in the Holy Roman Empire, Prussia, and the Federal Republic of Germany. Amicable settlements were a core practice in judicial courts of the early modern period. While recent studies tend to focus on strategies of litigants, this article shifts the attention to the process of decision-making from an institutional perspective. To that end, the author examines working procedures and tools of political influencing at court using examples of civil cases at judicial courts in the Holy Roman Empire (particularly the Imperial Aulic Council), in Prussia under the reign of Frederick the Great, and in the Federal Republic of Germany. As will be shown, throughout times institutional dispositions influence the outcome of judgements and amicable settlements at least to the same degree than strategies of litigants do.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
$42.00
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.


or
Log in with your institution

Journal + Issues

The Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte (ZRG, also known as the Savigny Journal) represents an integral part of European legal history research, having made a significant contribution to the current state of the discipline.

Search