Harmonisation of Civil Procedure: An Historical and Comparative Perspective

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the harmonisation of civil procedural law in Europe and on a global scale. As the title indicates, this will be done by also taking into consideration past experiences in this field. The question as to the desirability of harmonisation will not be discussed. The chapter will especially focus on (1) Harmonisation as a result of national law reform, (2) Harmonisation as a result of competition between procedural systems, and (3) Harmonisation as a result of international harmonisation projects.

Keywords

Procedural Rule Civil Procedure Hague Convention Civil Litigation International Harmonisation Project 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aa H et al (eds) (1968) Bronnen van de Nederlandse Codificatie sinds 1798. Kemink en Zoon NV, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  2. Albers P (2008) Judicial systems in Europe compared. In: Van Rhee CH, Uzelac A (eds) Civil justice between efficiency and quality: from Ius Commune to the CEPEJ. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 9–28Google Scholar
  3. Albers P (2009) Quality assessment of courts and the judiciary: from judicial quality to court excellence. In: Uzelac A, Van Rhee CH (eds) Access to justice and the judiciary: towards New European standards of affordability, quality and efficiency of civil adjudication. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 57–74Google Scholar
  4. ALI/UNIDROIT (2006) Principles of transnational civil procedure. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrews N (2003) English civil procedure. Fundamentals of the new civil justice system. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrews N (2009) A modern procedural synthesis: the American Law Institute and UNIDROIT’s ‘Principles and rules of transnational civil procedure.’ Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging 52–58Google Scholar
  7. Biondi A (2005) Minimum, adequate or excessive protection? The impact of EC law on national procedural law. In: Trockner N, Varano V (eds) The reforms of civil procedure in comparative perspective. Giappichelli Editore, Torino, pp 234–243Google Scholar
  8. Blok DP et al (eds) (1980) Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, vol IV. Unieboek B.V., BussumGoogle Scholar
  9. Burnham W (2006) Introduction to the law and legal system of the United States. Thomson/West, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  10. Chase OG et al (eds) (2007) Civil litigation in comparative context. Thomson/West, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  11. Díez-Picazo Giménez I (2005) The principal innovations of Spain’s recent civil procedure reform. In: Trockner N, Varano V (eds) The reforms of civil procedure in comparative perspective. Giappichelli Editore, Torino, pp 33–66Google Scholar
  12. Ervo L (2009) Party autonomy and access to justice. In: Ervo L, Gräns M, Jokela A (eds) Europeanization of procedural law and the new challenges to fair trial. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, pp 21–41Google Scholar
  13. Fasching HW (1988) Die Weiterentwicklung des österreichischen Zivilprozessrechts im Lichte der Ideen Franz Kleins. In: Hofmeister H (ed) Forschungsband Franz Klein (1854–1926). Leben und Wirken. Manz, Vienna, pp 97–117Google Scholar
  14. Freudenthal M (2007) Schets van het Europees civiel procesrecht. Kluwer, DeventerGoogle Scholar
  15. Hazard GC et al (2001) Introduction to the principles and rules of transnational civil procedure. NY Univ J Law Politics 33:769–784Google Scholar
  16. Heirbaut D (2009) Efficiency: the Holy Grail of Belgian Justice? In: Uzelac A, Van Rhee CH (eds) Access to justice and the judiciary: towards New European standards of affordability, quality and efficiency of civil adjudication. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 89–117Google Scholar
  17. Jongbloed AW (2005) The Netherlands (1838–2005). In: Van Rhee CH (ed) European traditions in civil procedure (Ius Commune Europaeum 54). Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 69–97Google Scholar
  18. Klein F (1891) Pro Futuro. Betrachtungen über Probleme der Civilprocessreform in Österreich, Franz Deuticke, Leipzig/WienGoogle Scholar
  19. Lindblom PH (1997) Harmony of legal spheres. A Swedish view on the construction of a unified European procedural law. Eur Rev Private Law 5:11–46Google Scholar
  20. Miller GP (1997) The legal-economic analysis of comparative civil procedure. Am J Comp Law 45:905–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oberhammer P, Domej T (2005) Germany, Switzerland and Austria (ca. 1800–2005). In: Van Rhee CH (ed) European traditions in civil procedure. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 103–128Google Scholar
  22. Storme M (1994) Approximation of judiciary law in the European union. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  23. Storskrubb E (2008) Civil procedure and EU law. A policy area uncovered. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stürner R (2005) The principles of transnational civil procedure. An introduction to their basic conceptions. Rabels Zeitschrift 201–254Google Scholar
  25. Trockner N, Varano V (2005) Concluding remarks. In: Trockner N, Varano V (eds) The reforms of civil procedure in comparative perspective. Giappichelli Editore, Torino, pp 243–267Google Scholar
  26. Van Caenegem R (2005) History of European civil procedure. In: International encyclopedia of comparative law, vol XVI. J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, pp 16–23Google Scholar
  27. Van Dijk P et al (2006) Theory and practice of the European convention on human rights. Intersentia, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Rhee CH (1997) Litigation and legislation. Civil procedure at first instance in the Great Council for the Netherlands in Malines (1522–1559), Archives générales du Royaume, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  29. Van Rhee CH (1998) English civil procedure until the civil procedure rules. In: Van Rhee CH (ed) European traditions in civil procedure. Intersentia, Oxford, pp 129–159Google Scholar
  30. Van Rhee CH (2000a) Civil procedure: a European Ius Commune? Eur Rev Private Law 8:589–611Google Scholar
  31. Van Rhee CH (2000b) ‘Ons tegenwoordig sukkelproces’. Nederlandse opvattingen over de toekomst van het burgerlijk procesrecht rond 1920, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis. pp 331–346Google Scholar
  32. Van Rhee CH (2003) Towards a procedural Ius Commune? In: Smits J, Lubbe G (eds) Remedies in Zuid-Afrika en Europa. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 217–232Google Scholar
  33. Van Rhee CH (ed) (2005a) European traditions in civil procedure. Intersentia, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Rhee CH (2005b) Introduction. In: Van Rhee CH (ed) European traditions in civil procedure. Intersentia, Oxford, pp 3–23Google Scholar
  35. Van Rhee CH (2006) The influence of the French Code de procédure civile (1806) in 19th Century Europe. In: Cadiet L, Canivet G (eds) De la Commémoration d’un code à l’autre: 200 ans de procédure civile en France. Litec, Paris, pp 129–165Google Scholar
  36. Van Rhee CH (2008) The development of civil procedural law in twentieth-century Europe: from party autonomy to judicial case management and efficiency. In: Van Rhee CH (ed) Judicial case management and efficiency in civil litigation. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 11–25Google Scholar
  37. Van Rhee CH (2010) Civil procedure in a globalizing world: a historical perspective. In: Faure MG, Van der Walt A (eds) Globalization and private law: the way forward. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 343–367Google Scholar
  38. Verkerk RR (2010) Fact-finding in civil litigation: a comparative perspective. Intersentia, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  39. Walter G, Baumgartner S (1998) Utility and feasibility of transnational rules of civil procedure: some German and Swiss reactions to the Hazard-Taruffo project. Tex Int Law J 33:463–476Google Scholar
  40. Walter G (2005) The German civil reform Act 2002: Much Ado about nothing? In: Trockner N, Varano V (eds) The reforms of civil procedure in comparative perspective. Giappichelli Editore, Torino, pp 67–89Google Scholar
  41. Wijffels A (2008) The Code de procédure civile (1806) in France, Belgium and the Netherlands. In: Van Rhee CH (ed) The French code of civil procedure (1806) after 200 years. The civil procedure tradition in France and abroad. Kluwer, Mechelen, pp 5–73Google Scholar
  42. Woolf H (1996) Access to justice: final report. http://www.dca.gov.uk/cil/final/index.htm (accessed June 2011)

Copyright information

© T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors/editors  2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations