欧洲上诉机会的协调:比较模式和ELI/统法社项目草案

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW Derecho PUCP Pub Date : 2020-05-29 DOI:10.18800/derechopucp.202001.012
Álvaro Pérez Ragone
{"title":"欧洲上诉机会的协调:比较模式和ELI/统法社项目草案","authors":"Álvaro Pérez Ragone","doi":"10.18800/derechopucp.202001.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Access to appeal in models compared with a dogmatic method and a compared one in Germany, United Kingdom, France and Italy is important since members of these systems wrote the draft of the ELI/Unidroit project. The objective of this project is to lay the foundations for the harmonization of the civil process for Europe. This way, it aims to describe each national model, analyze it and, then, at the end of the text, compare it with the mentioned project and the main trends in the matter. This contribution is mainly nourished by comparative legal contributions related to access and the filters of appeal, such as the casting of it as a center, and it’s not intended to cover other aspects of the work in progress. We will see that many aspects that already govern civil processes such as German and Italian are incorporated as proposals. Therefore, the idea is to take stock of the criticisms from the national models and examine how much they are reflected in this draft on appeal.","PeriodicalId":41953,"journal":{"name":"Derecho PUCP","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"La armonización del acceso a la apelación en Europa: modelos comparados y borrador del proyecto ELI/Unidroit\",\"authors\":\"Álvaro Pérez Ragone\",\"doi\":\"10.18800/derechopucp.202001.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Access to appeal in models compared with a dogmatic method and a compared one in Germany, United Kingdom, France and Italy is important since members of these systems wrote the draft of the ELI/Unidroit project. The objective of this project is to lay the foundations for the harmonization of the civil process for Europe. This way, it aims to describe each national model, analyze it and, then, at the end of the text, compare it with the mentioned project and the main trends in the matter. This contribution is mainly nourished by comparative legal contributions related to access and the filters of appeal, such as the casting of it as a center, and it’s not intended to cover other aspects of the work in progress. We will see that many aspects that already govern civil processes such as German and Italian are incorporated as proposals. Therefore, the idea is to take stock of the criticisms from the national models and examine how much they are reflected in this draft on appeal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Derecho PUCP\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Derecho PUCP\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202001.012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Derecho PUCP","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202001.012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与教条方法和德国、联合王国、法国和意大利的比较方法相比,在模型中获得上诉的机会很重要,因为这些系统的成员编写了ELI/Unitroit项目的草案。该项目的目标是为欧洲民事程序的协调奠定基础。通过这种方式,它旨在描述每一种国家模式,对其进行分析,然后在文本的最后,将其与上述项目和主要趋势进行比较。这一贡献主要来自与准入和上诉过滤器相关的比较法律贡献,例如将其作为一个中心,而不是旨在涵盖正在进行的工作的其他方面。我们将看到,德国和意大利等已经管辖民事程序的许多方面都被纳入提案。因此,我们的想法是评估国家模式的批评,并在上诉时审查这些批评在本草案中的反映程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
La armonización del acceso a la apelación en Europa: modelos comparados y borrador del proyecto ELI/Unidroit
Access to appeal in models compared with a dogmatic method and a compared one in Germany, United Kingdom, France and Italy is important since members of these systems wrote the draft of the ELI/Unidroit project. The objective of this project is to lay the foundations for the harmonization of the civil process for Europe. This way, it aims to describe each national model, analyze it and, then, at the end of the text, compare it with the mentioned project and the main trends in the matter. This contribution is mainly nourished by comparative legal contributions related to access and the filters of appeal, such as the casting of it as a center, and it’s not intended to cover other aspects of the work in progress. We will see that many aspects that already govern civil processes such as German and Italian are incorporated as proposals. Therefore, the idea is to take stock of the criticisms from the national models and examine how much they are reflected in this draft on appeal.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Las transgresiones respetuosas de la enseñanza del common law y el derecho civil en Quebec: lecciones del método transistémico de educación jurídica Violencia sexual y derecho penal: sobre los problemas contemporáneos en la interpretación del tipo penal de violación sexual en el Código Penal del Perú La formulación de un estándar normativo de imparcialidad que incorpore la imparcialidad objetivo-cognitiva en el ordenamiento jurídico peruano: un estudio sobre la repercusión de la jurisprudencia de los tribunales internacionales de derechos humanos Reflexiones sobre los fundamentos de la responsabilidad médica por wrongful life. ¿La vida como daño? Descripción de los riesgos y desafíos para la integridad académica de aplicaciones generativas de inteligencia artificial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1