Published by De Gruyter Oldenbourg

Volume 8 Issue 2

Issue of Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie

Contents
Journal Overview

Abhandlungen

October 18, 2016

Die anwaltliche Scheidungsberatung als stellvertretende Konsensrestitution: eine exemplarische Fallrekonstruktion

Beatrice Caesar-Wolf

Page range: 167-192

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a qualitative analysis (according to the “objectivehermeneutic” approach) of an attorney’s transcribed audio-taped verbal interactions with his client during a divorce consultation. The research question is to delinate some of those structural elements by which such interaction might be qualified as “professionalized”. The lawyers’ interaction with their clients are “professionalized” if they chrystallize upon three problem foci: a concern with the “competent” application of the legal norms at issue, a quasi-therapeutical concern with the emotional problems of the client, and an ethical concern with the realization of “justice”. Key aspects of the analysis are, how the attorney reduces the hostility and resolves the affective ambivalence of his client, how he creates reciprocity of divorce intention, how he interpretes the law in terms of fairness, and how he applies legal norms as Standards of „rationality“.

October 18, 2016

Die Autorität des Rechts

Eine soziale Kritik prozeduraler Rationalität

Klaus Eder

Page range: 193-230

October 18, 2016

Männer und Frauen vor dem Strafgericht: Aspekte geschlechtsspezifisch unterschiedlicher Thematisierung

Aldo Legnaro, Gerda Zill

Page range: 231-252

Abstract

The following study refers to the question whether the interaction in courtroom differs by the sex of defendants. A method of content analysis is presented regarding the main trial as a sequence of different thematic units. The results of the present study indicate that there is a tendency towards differential topics according to the sex of defendants. Primarily, this would prove true during the hearing of evidence. The problem of discriminating sentencing of female and male offenders however requests further studies.

October 18, 2016

Zur Transformation voluntaristischer Traditionsmuster in den britischen Arbeitsbeziehungen

Wolfgang-Ulrich Prigge

Page range: 253-284

Abstract

The Conservative government of Margret Thatcher achieved to change British labour relations by legal intervention. This change is subject to divergent interpretations. The distinction between labour relations under legal abstention (voluntarism), legal intervention and bargained corporatism enables the diagnosis of a crisis of voluntarism. This crisis should be mastered by an attitude of instrumental voluntarism. Instead of being rejected as a matter of policy legal regulations should be accepted so far as they could be useful to unions and employees. The attitude of instrumental voluntarism was finally put into practice by a kind of juridification emerging from bargained corporatism. This equally helped the new Conservative labour legislation on its way. The unions – being interested in a legal protection against unfair dismissal – had to accept a legal definition of the closed shop and its exemptions, i. e. a legal intervention in their membership relations. The unions had to cooperate with the government regularizing and controlling legal interventions in order to maintain and increase union security. Instrumental voluntarism furthered an attitude of sectional representation of interests encouraging the validity of legal norms even if only some groups of all employees could benefit from them.

Diskussion

October 18, 2016

Reprofessionalisierung – eine wahrscheinliche Zukunft für die Anwaltschaft

Michael Hartmann

Page range: 285-297

October 18, 2016

Rezensionen

Rüdiger Lautmann, Eckart Reidegeld, Frank Benseler, Ralf Rogowski, Michael Hartmann

Page range: 298-318

October 18, 2016

Berichte und Ankündigungen

Joachim J. Savelsberg, Alfons Bora, Karlhans Liebl, Volkmar Gessner, Armin Höland

Page range: 319-327

About this journal

About the Journal

Established in 1980, the Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie – The German Journal of Law and Society offers a forum for the academic analysis of law in its societal context and on the relationship between law and society. The notion of ‘society’ is interpreted broadly. The journal publishes contributions from all disciplines as long as the relationship between law and society can be identified as a core theme. Papers with a theoretical focus and empirically-based analyses are equally welcome. We also publish essays that do not follow the typical format of a journal article as long as the arguments and reasoning are of an academic standard. The journal also features a book review section which discusses recent sociology of law texts published in Germany and other countries. Submissions may be written in German or English.

Only original contributions will be published. However, contributions to the journal may be republished elsewhere provided that the place of first publication is cited.

An overview over the development of the journal can be found in: Cottier Michelle, Die Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie: seit bald 40 Jahren Kristallisationspunkt und Kommunikationsarena der deutschsprachigen Rechtssoziologie, in: Christian Boulanger (Hrsg.) "Rechtssoziologisch publizieren" – Dokumentation eines Rundtischgespräches, 26.03.2019, https://barblog.hypotheses.org/cottier-zeitschrift-fuer-rechtssoziologie.

Peer review

Contributions will be subject to a double blind peer review process, where necessary more than once, involving at least two external referees before the editors take a decision on publication.

Publication frequency

The journal is published twice a year and is included in the abstracting services of Sociological Abstracts and SOLIS – Sozialwissenschaftliches Literaturinformationssystem (a German social science database).