Advertisement

Reform and Development of Preparatory Proceedings in the Danish Civil Justice System: Towards (Even) More Efficient Courts

  • Jakob Juul-Sandberg
Chapter

Abstract

Regulation of civil procedure in Denmark is based on a long history of national legislation. The Danish civil justice system is one of the most well functioning in Europe and the Danish courts have evidently become more effective over the years. Through several reforms in the last decade, the civil justice system has been changed and restructured in order to adopt new digital technology. Structural reforms have also made the courts more efficient without compromising the basic principles on rule of law, access to courts and justice for all parties involved in a civil proceeding. Large parts of the reforms have focused on preparatory proceedings and the use of new technology as means to access the courts easier, get cases tried faster and lower the costs for parties. This article explores the implementation of reforms to the preparatory proceedings in the Danish justice system. It seeks to determine whether the actions have fulfilled their purposes, if the system is working sufficiently and discover whether there still are possible ways of making the process in civil cases more effective and less expensive without compromising rule of law or principles of access to courts and justice.

Keywords

District Court Civil Procedure Preparatory Proceeding Preparatory Stage Civil Case 
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. Aagaard H, Toftegaard Nielsen C (2008) Nye regler om retsmægling. Juristen 2008:167–172Google Scholar
  2. Adrian L (2012) Mellem retssag og rundbordssamtale – retsmægling i teori og praksis. Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  3. Adrian L, Bager S, Salung Petersen C (2015) Perspektiver på forligsmægling. Juristen 2015:98–106Google Scholar
  4. Amstrup Fournais A, Aschou Johannesen C (2012) Et paradigmeskifte i retsplejens tilgang til sagkyndig medvirken. UfR 2012(B):498–504Google Scholar
  5. Backhausen P, Lundblad C (eds) (2009) Proceduren, 3rd edn. Djøf Forlag, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  6. Consulting D (2013) Analyse af civile sager, Rapport fra udvalget for bedre og mere effektiv behandling af civile sager ved domstolene. Justitsministeriet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  7. Dalager C (2015) Civile retssager, 2nd edn. Djøf forlag, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  8. Gomard B, Kistrup M (2013) Civilprocessen, 7th edn. KARNOV Group, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  9. Højgaard Pedersen M (2009) Procesbevillingsnævnet efter domstolsreformen. Juristen 2009:31–35Google Scholar
  10. Jochimsen J (2012) Bevisførelse i retssager, 1st edn. KARNOV Group, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  11. Juul-Sandberg J (2011) Godsk Pedersen H V (eds). Adgang til fremlæggelse af ensidigt indhentede erklæringer for domstolene – med særligt henblik på boligretssager og tvister om mangler ved fast ejendom in Juridiske Emner ved Syddansk Universitet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  12. Juul-Sandberg J (2012) Boligrettens saglige kompetence in Tidsskrift for Bolig- og Byggeret, 2012:591–599Google Scholar
  13. Juul-Sandberg J (2013) Hvornår skal en sag udgå af småsagsprocessen i medfør af retsplejelovens § 402, stk. 1? in Fuldmægtigen 2014:193Google Scholar
  14. Juul-Sandberg J, Godsk Pedersen HV (eds) (2013) Lægdommere – Boligrettens legitimitet? in Juridiske emner ved Syddansk Universitet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  15. Lindencrone L, Werlauff E (2014) Dansk Retspleje, 5th edn. KARNOV Group, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  16. Nellemann J (1869) Foreløbigt Udkast til Lov om Rettergangsmaaden i borgerlige Domssager med Motiver. Trykt som manuskript, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  17. Nylund A (2014) European integration and Nordic civil procedure. In: Ervo L, Nylund A (eds) The future of civil litigation. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  18. Petersen CS (2014) A comparative perspective on recent Nordic reforms of civil justice. In: Ervo L, Nylund A (eds) The future of civil litigation. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  19. Pii N, Bagger T, Rasmussen K, Lindblom L, Kistrup M, Arnt Nielsen P, Jochimsen J, Møller J, Dybdahl O, Hertz K, Carlsen B, Rammeskow Bang-Pedersen U, Højlund Christensen L, Rothe H, Haargaard F, Kruse Mikkelsen J, Ellehauge M, Røn J, Dahl Sinding G, Hjortenberg J, Højgaard Mørup S, Lundblad C, Frost L, Talevski O, Andersen NM, Mavrogenis A, Backhausen P, Jensen T, Thønnings T, Juhl N, Møller Madsen R, Kernn-Jespersen L, Rørdam T, Danielsen S, Gammeltoft-Hansen H, Gomard B (eds) (2013) Retsplejeloven og Bruxelles I-forordningen med kommentarer I, 9th edn. Djøf Forlag, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  20. Rammeskov Bang Pedersen U, Højlund Christensen L (2015) Den civile retspleje, 3rd edn. Pejus, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  21. Sommer Jensen K (2011) Ensidige erklæringer i civilprocessen. Erhvervsjuridisk Tidsskrift 2011:317–332Google Scholar
  22. Taksøe Jensen F (1976) Materiel Procesledelse. Juristforbundet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  23. The Scandinavian Court Administrations (2007) The Danish courts - an organization in development. Scand Stud Law 51:581–590Google Scholar
  24. Udvalget om bedre og mere effektiv behandling af civile sager ved domstolene (2013) Bedre og mere effektiv behandling af civile sager ved domstolene. Ministry of JusticeGoogle Scholar
  25. von Eyben WE (1998) Dommertilkendegivelser 1987 til 1997 in U 1998 B:51–55Google Scholar
  26. von Eyben B (2008) Juridisk Ordbog, 13th edn. Thomson Reuters, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  27. Waage F, Herborn M (2015) Dimensions of evidence in European civil procedure: national report Denmark. DEECP, SloveniaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Werlauff E (1999) Common European procedural law. Djøf Publishing, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  29. Werlauff E (2000) Fælleseuropæisk procesret, 2nd edn. Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  30. Werlauff E (2010) Civil procedure in Denmark, 2nd edn. Djøf Forlag, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Danish Court Administration’s Homepage: http://www.domstol.dk/. Accessed 29 Jul 2015
  2. European Commission’s homepage: http://ec.europa.eu/. Accessed 29 Jul 2015
  3. The Danish Standing Committee on Procedural Law (Retsplejerådet) report no. 698/1973Google Scholar
  4. The Danish Standing Committee on Procedural Law (Retsplejerådet) report no.1481/2006Google Scholar
  5. The Danish Standing Committee on Procedural Law (Retsplejerådet) report no.1543/2013Google Scholar
  6. The Danish Standing Committee on Procedural Law (Retsplejerådet) report no. 1401/2001Google Scholar
  7. The Danish Standing Committee on Procedural Law (Retsplejerådet) report no. 1436/2004Google Scholar
  8. The Danish Supreme Court’s Homepage: http://www.hoejesteret.dk/. Accessed 29 Jul 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LawUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations