Důkazní standard v pozdně středověké právní teorii : konceptuální cesta

Patryk Maćkowiak

doi:10.5817/SHB2024-2-3

Standard of proof in late medieval legal theory : a conceptual journey

Roč.71,č.2(2024)

Patryk Maćkowiak

https://doi.org/10.5817/SHB2024-2-3

Trvalý odkaz (handle):
http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/digilib.80875

PDF (angličtina)

Abstrakt

Důkazní standard v pozdně středověké právní teorii : konceptuální cesta

For the first time in legal history, the system of proof was developed in late medieval learned law. Legal historians have long debated the role of the judge within this system. Some scholars argue that the idea of legal evidence existed in Roman or canon law, suggesting that the judge's role in evidentiary proceedings was confined to determining whether the presented evidence met specific, rigid standards. Conversely, other researchers propose that this system operated under different assumptions, asserting that judges possessed greater discretion in evaluating evidence, and that legal doctrine provided a framework for shaping the judge's conviction. Both perspectives offer a range of arguments supporting them. In this paper, I aim to briefly review selected scholarly positions on this issue, present my own interpretation and propose research directions for further inquiry. Upon reflecting on the meaning of the ordo iudiciarius procedure, I contend that, at least in the context of canon law, there is significant alignment with the concept of legal evidence.

Klíčová slova:
historiography; legal history; Roman law; canon law; law of proof

Stránky:
25–36

Reference

Johannes Teutonicus, Decretum mit der Glossa ordinaria, Venedig 1485. Available from: <a href=https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV035665778 target=_blank>https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV035665778.</a>

Enrico Segusio, Summa aurea, Venetiis 1570. Available from: <a href=https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV011946596 target=_blank>https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV011946596.</a>

Guillaume Durand, Speculum iudiciale, Mit Additiones von Johannes Andreae und Baldus de Ubaldis. Mit Inventarium von Berengarius Fredoli, Bd. 1–4, Lyon 1498–1500. Available from: <a href=https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV035783789 target=_blank>https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV035783789.</a>

Bergmann, Friedrich (ed.) (1965): Pillii, Tancredi, Gratiae. Libri de iudiciorum ordine, Göttingen, pp. 87–316 [reprint].

Fraher, Richard M. (ed.) (1979): Tancred's 'Summula de criminibus': A New Text and a Key to the Ordo iudiciarius, in: Bulletin o f Medieval Canon Law 9, pp. 23–35.

Friedberg, Emil (ed.) (1959): Corpus Iuris Canonici, vol. 1–2, Graz [reprint].

Seraphim, August (ed.) (1912): Das Zeugenverhör des Franciscus de Moliano (1312). Quellen zur Geschichte des Deutschen Ordens, Königsberg.

Asser, Daan (1994): Audi et alteram partem: a Limit to Judicial Activity, in: Andrew D. E. Lewis – David J. Ibbetson (eds.): The Roman Law Tradition, Cambridge, pp. 209–223.

Bellomo, Manilo (1995): The Common Legal Past of Europe, 1000–1800, Washington D.C.

Brundage, James A. (2007): Full and Partial Proof in Classical Canonical Procedure, in: The Jurist: Studies in Church Law and Ministry 67, pp. 58–71.

Brundage, James A. (2010): The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians and Courts, Chicago.

Endemann, Wilhelm (1860): Die Beweislehre des Civilprozesses, Heidelberg.

Fraher, Richard M. (1984): The Theoretical Justification for the New Criminal Law of the High Middle Ages: "Rei Publicae Interest, Ne Crimina Remaneant Impunita", in: University of Illinois Law Review 3, pp. 577–595, pp. 23–88.

Fraher, Richard M. (1989): Conviction according to conscience: the medieval jurists debate concerning judicial discretion and the law of proof, in: Law and History Review 7, pp. 23–88.

Lévy, Jean-Philippe (1939): La Hiérarchie des preuves dans le droit savant du Moyen-Age, depuis la Renaissance du droit romain jusqu'à la fin du XIVe siècle, Paris.

Litewski, Wiesław (1997): review of: Iudex w literaturze procesowej XII–XIII wieku, by Edward Szymoszek, in: Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Romanistische Abteilung 114, pp. 528–540.

Litewski, Wiesław (1999): Der römisch-kanonische Zivilprozeß nach den älteren ordines iudiciarii, Kraków.

Maćkowiak, Patryk (2022): Pojęcia notoryjności i famy w protokole procesu polsko-krzyżackiego z lat 1320–1321, in: Zapiski Historyczne 87/1, pp. 5–25.

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law (1996) /merriam-webster.com. Available from: <a href=https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/standard%20of%20proof, target=_blank>https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/standard%20of%20proof,</a> cited on 25th October 2024.

Müssig, Ulrike (2019): Reason and Fairness. Constituting Justice in Europe, from Medieval Canon Law to ECHR, Leiden – New York.

Nörr, Knut Wolfgang (2012): Romanisch-kanonisches Prozessrecht. Erkenntnisverfahren erster Instanz in civilibus, Berlin.

Pennington, Kenneth (1994): Learned Law, Droit Savant, Gelehrtes Recht: The Tyranny of a Concept, in: Rivista internazionale di diritto comune 5, pp. 197–209.

Pennington, Kenneth (2000): Innocent III and the lus commune, in: Richard H. Helmholz et al. (eds.): Grundlagen des Rechts: Festschrift für Peter Landau zum 65. Geburtstag, Paderborn, pp. 349–366.

Sinatti d'Amico, Franca (1966): Il concetto di prova testimoniale: spunti di una problematica nel pensiero dei glossatori, in: Rivista di Storia del diritto Italiano 39, pp. 155–185.

Szymoszek, Edward (1992): Iudex w literaturze procesowej XII–XIII wieku, Wrocław.

Théry, Julien (2003): Fama: l'opinion publique comme preuve. Aperçu sur la révolution médiévale de l'inquisitoire (XIIe-XIVe siècles), in: Bruno Lemesle (ed.): La preuve en justice de l'Antiquité à nos jours, Rennes, pp. 119–147.

Wojciechowski, Rafał (2010): Arbitraż w doktrynie prawnej średniowiecza, Wrocław.

Metriky