Menu Expand

Control of Supreme Courts in Early Modern Europe

Editors: Czeguhn, Ignacio | López Nevot, José Antonio | Sánchez Aranda, Antonio

Schriften zur Rechtsgeschichte, Vol. 181

(2018)

Additional Information

Book Details

Pricing

About The Author

Ignacio Czeguhn studierte Jura in Würzburg, wo er ebenfalls promovierte und habilitierte. Er ist Lehrstuhlinhaber an der Freien Universität Berlin für Bürgerliches Recht, Europäische und Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte sowie vergleichende Rechtsgeschichte, Mitglied im wissenschaftlichen Beirat der Gesellschaft für Reichskammergerichtsforschung, Mitglied der königlichen Akademie für Recht und Jurisprudenz in Granada und Träger der Georges-Sarton Medaille der Juristischen Fakultät der Universität Gent (2017).

Sánchez Aranda ist Professor für Rechtsgeschichte und Institutionen an der Universität von Granada. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte liegen in der Geschichte des Prozessrechts und der Verwaltung der Justiz, der Geschichte des öffentlichen Rechts und der Geschichte des Verfassungsrechts. In diesem Bereich hat er mehrere Arbeiten zur vergleichenden Geschichtswissenschaft in Europa veröffentlicht. Er hat an zahlreichen nationalen und internationalen Forschungsprojekten mitgewirkt, die sich auf das vergleichende Studium der Geschichte der höheren Justizverwaltung in Europa und der Geschichte des Verfassungsrechts konzentrierten. Er war Gastprofessor an den Universitäten Siena, FU Berlin, Regensburg, Saratov und Stetson University College of Law (Florida).

José Antonio Lopez Nevot ist Professor für Rechtsgeschichte und Institutionen an der Universität Granada (Spanien). Er war Gastprofessor an verschiedenen deutschen und italienischen Universitäten und leitet die Forschungsgruppe Justiz und Regierung in der Geschichte des spanischen und europäischen Rechts. Er gehört dem Editorial Board des Anuarion de Historia del Derecho Español an. Seine Forschungsarbeit befasste sich mit der Geschichte des Kommunalregimes, des Familieneigentumsrechts, des Strafrechts und der Rechtsliteratur. Gegenwärtig beschäftigt er sich mit der Geschichte der Justiz und insbesondere mit dem Studium der Verfahrenspraxis. Derzeit forscht er insbesondere zu den Fiskalprokuratoren der spanischen Krone.
Ignacio Czeguhn studied law in Würzburg, Dr. iur (PhD) and habilitation ibidem. He is Professor of Civil Law (Chair), German and European as well as Comparative Legal History, Member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Society for the research of the Imperial Chamber in the Holy Empire, Honorary Member of the Royal Academy of Jurisprudence and Legislation of Granada/Spain, awarded by the Law Faculty of the University of Ghent (2017) with the Georges Sarton medal.

José Antonio Lopez Nevot, Professor of Legal History and Institutions at the University of Granada (Spain). He has been a visiting professor at various German and Italian universities and leads the Justice and Government Research Group in the history of Spanish and European law. He is on the Editorial Board of the Anuarion de Historia del Derecho Español. His research focused on the history of the communal regime, family ownership, criminal law and legal literature. He is currently involved in the history of the judiciary and in particular in the study of procedural practice. He is currently researching in particular the fiscal procurators of the Spanish crown.

Antonio Sánchez Aranda, Professor of History of Law and Institutions at the University of Granada. His main lines of research are centered on the History of Procedural Law and the Administration of Justice, History of Public Law and History of Constitutional Law. In this area, he has published several works at the comparative study of historical law in Europe. He has collaborated in numerous research projects, both national and international, focused on the comparative study of the History of the Higher Justice Administration in Europe and the History of Constitutional Law. He has been a visiting professor at the Universities of Siena, FU Berlin, Regensburg, Saratov and Stetson University College of Law (Florida).

Abstract

The volume is the result of two workshops that dealt with the control of the highest courts in early modern Europe. The individual lectures examined which mechanisms of control in terms of concept and content were used in the early modern period and which actors were involved. The speakers considered the situation in the Holy Roman Empire, the Iberian Peninsula, Scotland and Sweden. A contribution defining control from a jurisprudential point of view, serves as an introduction. Kontrollmechanismen für Höchstgerichte sind im heutigen Europa selten zu finden. In einigen Ländern existieren Ombudsmänner, die durch die Bürger angerufen werden können, wenn diese den Eindruck haben, ein Höchstgericht hätte Unrecht entschieden. In den meisten Ländern ist aber das Höchstgericht die letzte Instanz, gegen dessen Entscheidung es kein Rechtsmittel gibt. Ganz anders war dies in der Frühen Neuzeit, in der vor allem das Bild des Monarchen als höchster Richter vorherrschte.

Der Band ist das Ergebnis zweier Workshops, die sich mit der Kontrolle der Höchstgerichte im Europa der Frühen Neuzeit beschäftigen. In den einzelnen Vorträgen wurde untersucht, welche Mechanismen von Kontrolle begrifflich und inhaltlich in der Frühen Neuzeit gegriffen haben und welche Akteure dabei tätig waren. Die Vortragenden beleuchteten die Situation im Heiligen Römischen Reich, der iberischen Halbinsel, Schottland und Schweden.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Preface 5
Table of Contents 7
I. Meeting Berlin 9
Bertram Lomfeld: Watching the Watchmen. Power Analyses of Democratic Judicial Systems 11
I. Typology of Power and Court Control 13
1. Personal Domination (Causal Interaction) 13
2. Social Institutions (Causal Structure) 14
3. Sphere of Action (Modal Interaction) 14
4. Social Dispositive (Modal Structure) 14
II. Executive Court Control 15
1. Executive Orders (Causal Interaction) 16
2. Appointment of Judges (Causal Structure) 16
3. Executive Supervision (Modal Interaction) 16
4. Judicial Formation (Modal Structure) 17
III. Legislative Court Control 18
1. Substantial Law (Causal Interaction) 19
2. Appointment of Judges (Causal Structure) 19
3. Form of Procedure (Modal Interaction) 19
4. Court Competences (Modal Structure) 20
IV. Judicial Court Control 21
1. Appeal System (Causal Interaction) 21
2. Judicial Dialogue (Causal Structure) 21
3. Judicial Self-Government (Modal Interaction) 22
4. Judicial Self-Restraint (Modal Structure) 23
V. Public Court Control 23
1. Public Critique (Causal Interaction) 24
2. Jury or Lay Judges (Causal Structure) 24
3. Judicial Transparency (Modal Interaction) 25
4. Judicial Reasoning (Modal Structure) 25
VI. Conclusion: Procedural Control 26
Ulrike Müßig: Control of Courts by Prerogative Writs. Jurisdictional Conflicts as “Constitutional” Conflicts 29
I. Introduction 29
II. The Prerogative Courts in General 30
1. The Court of Star Chamber 30
2. The Court of High Commission 31
3. Excursus: The Ex-Officio-Oath 32
III. The Rise of Opposition Against the Prerogative Courts 34
1. Criticism by Common Law Lawyers and Puritans 34
2. The Verdict in Caudrey's Case 1591 and the Initial Acceptance of the Peculiarities of Clerical Law 35
IV. The Prerogative Writs as Judicial Means Against the Prerogative Courts 36
1. Prerogative Writs in General 36
2. The Writs of Prohibition as Legal Instruments to Remove Proceedings from Clerical Courts 38
V. Conflicts Between Common Law-Courts and Prerogative Courts Under the Stuart Monarchy 39
1. The Hampton Court Conference (1604) and its Consequences 39
2. Edward Coke (1552–1634) and his Institutes of the Laws of England (1628–1644) 40
3. The Common Law Courts' Use of Writs of Prohibition and Writs of Habeas Corpus 42
4. The Nicholas Fuller's Case (1607) and the Attempted Divestiture of the High Commission 45
5. The Writs de Non Procedendo Rege Inconsulto in Prohibitions Del Roy (1607) and Brownlow v. Cox and Michell (1615) 49
6. The Common Law Attacks Against Star Chamber 52
VI. The Struggle over Habeas Corpus Writs Against the Court of Chancery 54
VII. Conclusion: Courts' History as Constitutional History 58
J. D. Ford: Epistolary Control of the College of Justice in Scotland 63
I. Background to James V's Promise 64
II. Reverberations of James V's Promise 69
III. Increase in the Incidence of Private Writings 76
IV. Decrease in the Incidence of Private Writings 83
Wolfgang Sellert: New Findings Regarding the Influence of the Ruler on the Supreme Jurisdiction in the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation 89
I. The Imperial Chamber Court 90
II. The Aulic Council 90
Mia Korpiola: Swedish Court under Scrutiny: An Inspection of the Svea Court of Appeal in 1636 95
I. Introduction 95
II. The Svea Court of Appeal 96
III. The Instrument of Governance of 1634: The Legal Authority for the Inspection of the Svea Court of Appeal in 1636 98
IV. The Svea Court under Scrutiny 101
V. Laxity of Control: Improving Record-Keeping and Supervising the Execution of Sentences 103
VI. Blind Justice or Class Justice? Criticism of the Unequality Before the Law 106
VII. Practices of the Court: Deficiencies and Their Permanent Remedies 109
VIII. Conclusion: Exceptional Event with Lasting Results 112
Mark Godfrey: Control and the Constitutional Accountability of the College of Justice in Scotland, 1532–1626 117
I. The Foundation of the College of Justice: The Relationship Between the Session and the King 124
II. Charles I's Reform of 1626 and Relations Between the King and the Session 131
III. Perceptions of the Constitutional Status of the College of Justice 1532–1626 136
1. Quorum 139
2. The Balance of Spiritual and Temporal Representation in Decision-Making 142
IV. Conclusion 147
José Antonio López Nevot: The Visitatio Generalis Magistratuum in the Decisiones of Juan Bautista Larrea (1639) 149
Documental Appendix 170
Visita de la Chançilleria de Granada (Archivo Histórico Nacional, Consejos, leg. 13.527) 170
Visita de la Audiençia de Granada 170
Miguel Angel Morales Payàn: The Complex Relations Between the Executive and the Judiciary: Some Scenes of Dispute During the Mid-19th Century 175
I. The State of Justice at the End of the 18th Century and the Beginning of the 19th Century 176
II. The Year 1837 179
III. The Year 1837 in Granada 182
IV. Attacks on the Independence of Judicial Power 187
Attachments 198
1. Escrito Dirigido por los Miembros de la Audiencia Territorial de Granada al Congreso en 13 de Agosto de 1837 198
2. Suplemento al BOC del Lunes 18 de Septiembre de 1837 203
3. Proclama Que Dirige el Capitán General de Granada, Juan Palarea en 21 de Setiembre de 1837 204
II. Meeting Granada 207
Anja Amend-Traut: External and Internal Control of the Imperial Chamber Court 209
I. External Control 210
1. By the Emperor 210
2. By the Imperial Estates 212
a) Visitations 212
b) Staffing of the Imperial Chamber Court 217
3. By the Parties 219
a) “Revision” 219
b) Declaratio Sententiae – Amendment of a Judgement 221
c) Recourse 222
d) “Syndicate Action” 223
II. Internal Control 226
1. Voluntary Self-Control 226
a) Visitation Decrees 226
b) Senate Decisions 227
2. Common Orders (“Gemeine Bescheide”) – Delegated Self-Control 227
III. Conclusion 229
J. D. Ford: Control of the Procedure of the College of Justice in Scotland 231
I. Foundation of the College of Justice 232
II. Reformation of the College of Justice 234
III. Regulation of the College of Justice 237
IV. Moderation of the College of Justice 242
V. Preservation of the College of Justice 245
Marina Rojo Gallego-Burín: La Imagen de Fernando el Católico y la Justicia. En la Literatura Histórica y Política (Siglos XVI–XVII) 247
I. La Justicia Durante el Reinado de los Reyes Católicos 247
II. Literatura Histórica 249
III. Literatura Política 253
IV. Literatura Emblemática y de Empresas 257
Fuentes Históricas y Políticas 262
Bibliografia 264
Wolfgang Sellert: Kontrolle gerichtlicher Entscheidungen durch Nichtigkeitsklagen und Nichtigkeitsbeschwerden – ihre Geschichte und ihr Missbrauch im Nationalsozialismus 267
I. Die Nichtigkeitsklage nach geltendem deutschen Prozessrecht und ihre historischen Wurzeln 267
1. Ursprünge im Römischen Recht 268
2. Die Lehren des Gemeinen Rechts 269
3. Die Nichtigkeitsklage vor den höchsten Reichsgerichten 271
a) Das Reichskammergericht (RKG) 272
b) Der kaiserliche Reichshofrat (RHR) 275
4. Kontinuitäten der Nichtigkeitsklage 277
II. Die Nichtigkeitsbeschwerde im NS-Staat 279
III. Zusammenfassung 282
Summary 282
José Antonio Pérez Juan: Notes on \"la Visita\" to Castille 285
I. Introduction 285
II. General Considerations 287
III. Proceedings of ˋla Visita' 289
1. Appointment 289
2. The Process 290
3. The Outcomes of \"la Visita 293
IV. Conclusions 295
José Antonio López Nevot: La exigencia de responsabilidad del Justicia de Aragón: el proceso de Enquesta 297
I. Introducción 297
II. Las Cortes de Monzón de 1390 y el proceso de Enquesta 302
III. Las reformas de Juan II. El tribunal de los Diecisiete Judicantes 309
IV. La Enquesta a Partir de las Cortes de Tarazona de 1592 317
V. Consideraciones conclusivas 322
List of Authors 325