Clarity in justice Dr Andrs Osztovits judge Kria

  • Slides: 10
Download presentation
Clarity in justice Dr. András Osztovits judge, Kúria Courts and Communication V. , Budapest

Clarity in justice Dr. András Osztovits judge, Kúria Courts and Communication V. , Budapest - 2017

Jurisprudence-analysing working group Set up by the President of Kúria, 2013 Aim: examine the

Jurisprudence-analysing working group Set up by the President of Kúria, 2013 Aim: examine the drafting methods of Hungarian court decisions Members: 6 Kúria judges, a linguistics professor, a playreader, an IT expert Forming 3 sub-groups: linguistics, information technology, comparative law

Linguistics sub-group Result of examination several hundred decisions - cumbersome sentence structure, stylistic errors,

Linguistics sub-group Result of examination several hundred decisions - cumbersome sentence structure, stylistic errors, grammatical mistakes - no uniform spelling rules of dates, numbers, names, abbreviations - legal expalantion lengthy and cumbersome - detailed factual background with non-relevant informations

Information technology sub-group - part of decisions can be automated - computer programme can

Information technology sub-group - part of decisions can be automated - computer programme can be developed: - can offer textual variables - can recognise names, sensitive datas - not tie the judges’ hand - result more uniform and searchable decisions

Comparative law sub-group Sources: - Magna Charta of Judges (CCJE) - Vilnius Declaration (ENCJ)

Comparative law sub-group Sources: - Magna Charta of Judges (CCJE) - Vilnius Declaration (ENCJ) - drafting practices of 18 European countries Results: - use of clear and understandable terms is a universal need - shorten the length of decisions

Summary report Published in 2014 Five levels of unification of decision writing: 1. linguistic

Summary report Published in 2014 Five levels of unification of decision writing: 1. linguistic correctness 2. stylistic correctness 3. citation uniformity 4. structural uniformity 5. contents Need for a stylebook

Stylebook Conclusions: - logical set of arguments in the reasons of a decision -

Stylebook Conclusions: - logical set of arguments in the reasons of a decision - only necessary factual background - summarisation and categorisation of parties arguments - avoid irrelevant explanations

Stylebook References to legal rules References to case law References to legal literature References

Stylebook References to legal rules References to case law References to legal literature References to explanatory note of Ministry of Justice

First experiences of the Stylebook Recommendation of the President of Kúria (2014) Positive feedback

First experiences of the Stylebook Recommendation of the President of Kúria (2014) Positive feedback from courts and legal professionals More transparent and searchable decisions 5 years later a new analysing working group

Thank you for your attention!

Thank you for your attention!