Nomophilacy and Beyond: Comparative Reflections on Judicial Precedents by Supreme Jurisdictions in Italy and Japan
Nomophilacy and Beyond: Comparative Reflections on Judicial Precedents by Supreme Jurisdictions in Italy and Japan
复制标题
非亲和性及其他：意大利和日本最高司法管辖区司法先例的比较反思
DOI：
10.1163/22134514-00204001
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
0.5
通讯作者：
Giorgio Fabio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Colombo;Giorgio Fabio
大陆法系在没有明确的判决规则的情况下如何依赖判例的问题是比较法中争论最多的话题之一。虽然大多数研究集中在法律的系统的融合和/或依赖于社会法律的反思，本文采用了制度的基础上比较的最高法院的意大利和日本，两个民法国家有许多相似之处，在历史上，民事诉讼制度的看法，并最终走向准先例模式。本研究试图证明，即使在没有正式约束力的先例的情况下，技术性的、程序性的规则也使最高法院的判决成为规范形成的基础。分析突出了每个因素（即最高法院的结构和运作、民事诉讼程序改革、诉诸司法的机会）和行为者（即法官、学者）在意大利和日本判例的形成和适用中所占的不同权重。
The issue of howcivil lawjurisdictions rely on precedents in the absence of a firmstare decisisrule is one of the most debated topics in comparative law. While most studies focus on the convergence of legal systems and/or rely on socio-legal reflections, this paper employs an institutional approach based on the comparison of the supreme courts of Italy and Japan, twocivil lawcountries that share many similarities in history, perceptions of the civil litigation system, and eventual drift towards a quasi-precedential model. The study tries to demonstrate that even when there are no formally binding precedents,technical,proceduralrules make supreme courts’ decisions fundamental for the formation of norms. The analysis highlights the different weight each factor (i.e. structure and functioning of the supreme courts, reforms in civil procedure, access to justice) and actor (i.e. judges, scholars) has in the formation and application of precedents in Italy and Japan.