Chapter

Similarity and Difference

Mitchel de S.-O.-l’E. Lasser

in Judicial Deliberations

Published in print July 2009 | ISBN: 9780199575169
Published online January 2010 | e-ISBN: 9780191706714 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199575169.003.0005

Series: Oxford Studies in European Law

Similarity and Difference

Show Summary Details

Preview

This chapter looks at the underlying similarities and differences in judicial argumentation between the Cour de cassation of France, the United States Supreme Court, and the European Court of Justice (ECJ). What characterises the French and ECJ judicial systems is not their formalism, but their respective bifurcation into two relatively distinct discursive spheres. For both courts, the official judicial decisions constitute magisterial discursive spheres in which the courts write collegially and offer relatively deductive forms of argument and reasoning. For both courts, conversely, the Report of the Reporting Judges and the Conclusions/Opinions of the Advocates General constitute relatively unceremonious discursive spheres in which the judicial magistrates write individually and offer relatively non-deductive and purposive forms of argument and reasoning. This chapter also looks at traditional American accounts of French civil law and American common law difference.

Keywords: judicial argumentation; Cour de cassation; France; United States; Supreme Court; European Court of Justice; judicial decisions; magistrates; civil law; common law

Chapter.  8803 words. 

Subjects: Comparative Law

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.