BLR  Vol.5 No.3 , September 2014
Bringing Certainty and Order Out of the Wilderness of Law
Abstract: The codification of the French civil law represented the first significant initiative which provided the moral and intellectual impetus for systematic reorganization and reform of the law. The growing production of laws by the legislatures, together with the courts’ constant definition of the principles of law, has always constituted a massive problem in providing a service of certain and equal justice. The French model of codification was undoubtedly useful but it did not suffice, by itself, to preserve a coherent and accessible system of law. The experience of the last decades showed a proliferation of new sources of law (including multilevel systems of protection of fundamental rights) that increased the complexity of law on a more than proportional scale. In order to tackle the compelling need of certainty and order in the legal systems, the French codification approach had been developed and integrated with other simplifying and reorganizing tools. The different experiences are interesting under three profiles: a) the subjects dedicated to the function of simplifying and clarifying the law; b) the tools used to perform the function; c) the effects produced in the legal systems. The comparative analysis of the different experiences in Civil law and Common law countries reveals a major tendency to constitute independent bodies by initiative of a law experts elìte of lawyers, judges and academics. Generally, these bodies adopt a scientific method in order to produce shared documents which are supposed to represent a valid reference for all the legal operators. Most of the time there is no political influence on the process, contributing to preserve the authoritativeness of the body. Notwithstanding, the documents may be addressed to the parliaments with the purpose to enact law reforms through the legislative process. Out of these cases, the documents are supposed to have mere persuasive value but it is disputed how they affect the other sources of law when they are widely adopted by courts.
Cite this paper: Martinuzzi, A. (2014). Bringing Certainty and Order Out of the Wilderness of Law. Beijing Law Review, 5, 172-183. doi: 10.4236/blr.2014.53017.

[1]   Adams, K. D. (2007a). The American Law Institute: Justice Cardozo’s Ministry of Justice? Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 32, 173-210.

[2]   Adams, K. D. (2007b). Blaming the Mirror: The Restatements and the Common Law. Indiana Law Review, 40, 205 (Indianapolis, IN).

[3]   Berkowitz, R. (2005). From Science to Technique: Friedrich Carl von Savigny, the BGB, and the Self-Overcoming of Legal Science. The Gift of Science: Leibniz and the Modern Legal Tradition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[4]   Berti Arnoaldi Veli, G. (2011). Gli Osservatori sulla Giustizia civile e i protocolli di udienza. Bologna: Ed. Il Mulino.

[5]   Bientinesi, F. (2014). Note sul funzionamento del Comitato per la legislazione.

[6]   Cadiet, L. (2006). La Legalité procedurale en matiére civile. Paris: Bulletin d’Information de la Cour de cassation.

[7]   Calabresi, G. (1983). A Common Law for the Age of Statutes. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.

[8]   Calabresi, G. (2012). Il mestiere di giudice. Pensieri di un accademico americano. Bologna: Ed. il Mulino.

[9]   Calamandrei, P. (1976). La Cassazione civile. Now in Opere Giuridiche. VI. Napoli.

[10]   Caponi, R. (2011). L’Attività degli Osservatori sulla Giustizia Civile nel Sistema delle Fonti del Diritto. In Gli Osservatori sulla Giustizia civile e i protocolli di udienza (pp. 57-64). Bologna: Ed. Il Mulino.

[11]   Cardozo, B. N. (1921). A Ministry of Justice. Harvard Law Review, 35, 113-126.

[12]   Cardozo, B. N. (1924). The Growth of the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

[13]   Copeland Nagle, J. (1996). Corrections Day. UCLA Law Review, 43, 1267-1268.

[14]   Etherton, T. (2007). Law Reform in England and Wales: A Shattered Dream or Triumph of Political Vision? Report of the Bar Law Reform Committee Lecture, London: British and Irish Legal Information Institute.

[15]   Feinberg, W. (1976). A National Court of Appeals? 42 Brooklyn Law Review 611.

[16]   Flores, I. B. (1995). La técnica jurìdica en la aplicacìon del derecho. Revista de la Facultad de Derecho, México. t. 45, Nos. 201-202.

[17]   Friendly, H. J. (1963). The Gap in Lawmaking—Judges Who Can’t and Legislators Who Won’t. Columbia Law Review, 63, 787-807.

[18]   Ginsburg, R. B., & Huber, P. W. (1986). The Intercircuit Committee. Harvard Law Review, 100, 1417-1435.

[19]   Ginsburg, R. B. (1987). A Plea for Legislative Review. 60 Southern California Law Review, 995.

[20]   Gouvin, E. J. (1994). Truth in Savings and the Failure of Legislative Methodology. 62 University of Cincinnati Law Review 1281, 1370.

[21]   Indlekofer, M. (2013). International Arbitration and the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Augsburg: Wolter Kluwer Law & Business.

[22]   Kramer, L. (1991). “The One-Eyed Are Kings”: Improving Congress’s Ability to Regulate the Use of Judicial Resources. Law and Contemporary Problems, 54, 73-97.

[23]   Lee, F. P., & Beaman, M. G. (1927). Legal Status of the New Federal Code. 11 Marquette Law Review, 130-145 (Milwaukee, Wisconsin).

[24]   Lynch, M. (1997). The US Code, the Statutes at Large, and Some Peculiarities of Codification. Legal Reference Services Quarterly, 16, 69-84.

[25]   Magendie, J. C. (2004). Célérité et qualité de la justice. La gestion du temps du procés, Rapport au Garde des Sceaux, ministre de la Justice. Paris: La documentation francaise.

[26]   McKinney, R. J. (2006). Basic Overview on How Federal Laws Are Published, Organized and Cited. FLICC Program on Federal Legislative Research, Law Librarian Society of Washington DC.

[27]   Oakes, J. L. (1989). Grace Notes on “Grace under Pressure”. 50 Ohio State Law Journal 701, Columbus, OH.

[28]   Paulson, S. L., & Lischewski Paulson, B. (1998). Normativity and Norms: Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian Themes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[29]   Perju, V. (2009). A Comment on “Legisprudence”. Boston University Law Review, 89, 427.

[30]   Postema, G. J. (1987). The Normativity of Law. In R. Gavison (Ed.), Issues in Contemporary Legal Philosophy: The Influence of H. L. A. Hart (pp. 81-104). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

[31]   Punzi, C. (2010). Il processo civile (Sistema e problematiche). Vol. II, Torino: Giappichelli Ed.

[32]   Radaelli, C. M. (2001). L’analisi di impatto della regolazione in prospettiva comparata. Soveria Mannelli: Rubettino Ed.

[33]   Stevens, J. P. (1982). Some Thoughts on Judicial Restraint. Judicature, 66, 177-183.

[34]   Trantino, E. (2002). Report n. 1/2002. Committee on Legislation of the Italian Parliament. First Presidency, 21 June 2001-25 April 2002.

[35]   Traynor, R. J. (1968). Statutes Revolving in Common-Law Orbits. Catholic University Law Review, 17, 401.

[36]   Tudela, R. (2006). Décret du 28 décembre 2005: Vers une contractualisation de la procédure civile? in Gazz. Pal. Doctr.

[37]   United States. Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate System (1975). Structure and Internal Procedures: Recommendations for Change. Washington: The Commission.

[38]   van den Berg, A. J. (2013). International Arbitration: The Coming of a New Age. In ICCA Congress Series 17. London: Kluwer Law International.

[39]   Vetri, D. (1998). Communicating between the Planets: Law Reform for the Twenty-First Century. Willamette Law Review, 34, 169.

[40]   von Savigny, F. K. (1814, 2nd rev. ed. 1828). Vom Beruf unserer Zeit fur Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (Eng. trans., Frederick Charles von Savigny, (1831) Of the Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and Jurisprudence, Abraham Hayward trans). London: Littlewood.

[41]   White, G. E. (1997). The American Law Institute and the Triumph of Modernist Jurisprudence. Law and History Review, 15, 1-47.

[42]   Wintgens, L. J. (2007). Legitimacy, and Legitimation from the Legisprudential Perspective. In Legislation in Context: Essays in Legisprudence (pp. 3, 4). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.

[43]   Zaccaria, R. (2011). Fuga dalla Legge? Seminari sulla qualità della legislazione. Brescia: Grafo Ed.