Abstract
Even though judicial independence guaranteed by the German constitution is of great importance and judges emphasize that tight formal requirements for judicial decision-making collide with judicial independence, the efficiency principle also applies to Justice (principle of effective legal protection). The digitization of judicial communication requires structure: structuring in the sense of standardization of metadata in pleadings sent by lawyers to the courts, enabling the judges to read the data electronically and to work on the digital documents; structuring data concerning the time of delivery of documents simplifies the automatic implementation of data into the court files; structuring the content in certain kinds of litigation such as orders for payment or small claims procedures. In addition to the advantage of electronically reading and working on structured documents, structuring offers the opportunity in cross-border procedures to automatically translate documents into other official EU languages. Overcoming language barriers is a key advantage for enhancing the further development of the European area of freedom, security and justice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Specialized modules for family court proceedings, information about the pension claims, insolvency matters, register matters, criminal matters, order for payment procedures, land register matters, the central register of the federal chamber of public notaries, communication of the public notaries, for small claims, for electronic filing between courts and the German pension insurance, for payments on the basis of the Single Euro Payments Area, for the e-customs software, bailiff software, foreclosure, e-files and file structures, electronic delivery certificate.
References
Bernhardt, W. (2015). Die deutsche Justiz im digitalen Zeitalter. NJW, 68(38), 2775–2780.
Beuth, P. (2016). Bundesregierung will mehr über Googles Algorithmus wissen-Keine Offenlegung der Algorithmen-zumindest nicht für alle. Zeit Online, Digitaler Artikel.
BGBl.I. (2017). Verordnung über die technischen Rahmenbedingungen des elektronischen Rechtsverkehrs und über das besondere elektronische Behördenpostfach (Elektronischer-Rechtsverkehr-Verordnung-ERVV) 3803.
Council of the European Union, & European Parliament. (2015). Regulation (EU) 2015/2421 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure and Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 creating a European order for payment procedur, Pub. L. No. OJ (EU) L 341/1. Strasbourg (FR).
Council of the European Union, & European Parliament. (2016). Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure, Pub. L. No. OJ (EU) L 399/1.
Deutscher Juristentag e.V. (2014). Beschlüsse-Prozessrecht-III. Reform des Erkenntnisverfahrens-Nr. 13: Über verbindliche Regelungen ist sicherzustellen, dass die Parteien ihren Vortrag zum tatsächlichen und rechtlichen Vorbringen strukturieren. In 70. Deutscher Juristentag (p. 5). Hannover.
Europäische Kommission. (2017a). Europäisches Verfahren für geringfügige Forderungen. Retrieved August 6, 2018, from https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_small_claims-42-de.do.
Europäische Kommission. (2017b). Mahnverfahren. Retrieved August 6, 2018, from https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_order_for_payment_procedures-41-de.do.
Fallsoft GmbH. (n.d.). NeBis-Softwaregestützte juristische Fallbearbeitung. Retrieved from https://www.fallsoft.de/ (website currently being revised).
Gaier, R. (2013). Der moderne liberale Zivilprozess. NJW, 66(39), 2871–2876.
Gaier, R. (2015). Strukturiertes Parteivorbringen im Zivilprozess. ZRP, 48(4), 101–104.
Köbler, R. (2016). Das Gesetz zur Förderung des elektronischen Rechtsverkehrs mit den Gerichten und die Chancen zu einer ergonomischen Verbesserung der richterlichen Arbeitsmöglichkeiten-und von den Risken. DVBI, 131(23), 1506–1510.
Mörs, N. (2018). Beste Freunde: Digitalisierung und Prozessmanagement. Retrieved August 7, 2018, from https://ixtenso.com/de/story/32854-beste-freunde-digitalisierung-prozessmanagement.html.
Normfall GmbH. (n.d.). Was leistet der Manager? Retrieved October 4, 2018, from http://www.normfall.de/normfall-manager/was-leistet-der-manager.
Smith, M. (2016). In Wisconsin, a backlash against using data to foretell defendants’ futures. The New York Times, Digital Article.
Tashea, J. (2017). Courts are using AI to sentence criminals. That must stop now. Wired Magazine, Digital Article.
Vorwerk, V. (2017). Strukturiertes Verfahren im Zivilprozess. NJW, 69(32), 2326–2330.
Zwickel, M. (2016). Die Strukturierung von Schriftsätzen. MDR, 70(16), 988–992.
Zwickel, M. (2018). Die digitale Strukturierung und inhaltliche Erschließung zivilprozessualer Schriftsätze im Spannungsfeld zwischen Parteiherrschaft und Richtermacht. In A. Buschmann, A.-C. Gläß, H.-H. Gonska, M. Philipp, & R. Zimmermann (Eds.), Digitalisierung der gerichtlichen Verfahren und das Prozessrecht-3. Tagung junger Prozessrechtswissenschaftler und-wissenschaftlerinnen (pp. 179–205). Berlin, Leibzig: Dunker & Humblot.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bernhardt, W. (2019). Structuring Judicial Communication. In: Bergener, K., Räckers, M., Stein, A. (eds) The Art of Structuring. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06234-7_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06234-7_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-06233-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-06234-7
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)