From Transnational Principles to European Rules of Civil Procedure is a joint project of the European Law Institute (ELI) and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT). This paper gives a systematic presentation of the progress by one of the project’s working groups tasked with the elaboration of rules on the obligations of parties, lawyers and judges using as a starting point Principle 11 of the Transnational Principles of Civil Procedure produced by the American Law Institute (ALI) and UNIDROIT. Since November 2014, progress by the Working Group has advanced, resulting in a number of draft rules dealing with procedural obligations (and sanctions for their breach) related to case management, pleading of facts, evidence and law and the efforts to achieve autonomous settlement of civil disputes. The paper describes the major achievements of this work, emphasising several important changes in comparison to the conventional approach to procedural obligations.
Código Iberoamericano De Ética Judicial, (2006) <http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/CUMBREJUDI CIALIBEROAMERICANA/Documents/CodigoEtico.pdf>.
Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers, Recommendation No. R (84) 5 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States ‘On the Principles of Civil Procedure Designed to Improve the Functioning of Justice’.
Ervo L. , Gräns M., and Jokela, A. (eds), Europeanization of Procedural Law and the New Challenges to Fair Trial (Europa Law Pub. 2009).
Ervo, L., and Nylund, A. (eds), Current trends in Preparatory Proceedings. A Comparative Study of Nordic and Former Communist Countries (Springer 2016).
European Parliament, Council of the European Union, Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on Certain Aspects of Mediation in Civil and Commercial Matters (2008).
Joint American Law Institute / UNIDROIT Working Group on Principles and Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure, ALI/UNIDROIT Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure. Appendix: rules of transnational civil procedure (A Reporter’s Study), (2005).
Klein, F. , Pro Futuro. Betrachtungen über Probleme der Civilprozeßreform in Oesterreich (Deuticke 1891).
Manko, R. , Europeanization of civil procedure. Towards common minimum standards? (European Parliament EPRS PE 559.499, 2015).
Storme, M. (ed), Approximation of Judiciary Law in the European Union (Kluwer 1994).
The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), The Charter of Core Principles of the European Legal Profession and Code of Conduct for European Lawyers (Brussels 2013).
Tulibacka, M., Blomeyer, R., and Sanz, M., Common minimum standards of civil procedure (European Parliament EPRS PE 581.385, 2016).
Uzelac, A. , ‘Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEJ Evaluations’ in Kramer, X.E. and van Rhee, C.H. (eds), Civil Litigation in a Globalising World (T.M.C. Asser Press and Springer 2012) 175–205.
Uzelac, A. , ‘Croatia: Omnipotent judges as the Cause of Procedural Inefficiency and Impotence’ in van Rhee and Fu (eds), Civil Litigation in China and Europe (Springer 2014) 197–221
Uzelac, A. (ed), Goals of Civil Justice and Civil Procedure in Contemporary Judicial Systems (Springer 2014). [Uzelac (2014b)].
Van Rhee, C.H. , ‘Obligations of the Parties and their Lawyers in Civil Litigation: The ALI/UNIDROIT Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure’ in J., Adolphsen et al., Festschrift für Peter Gottwald zum 70. Geburtstag (Beck 2014) 689–99.
Van Rhee, C.H. and Fu, Y. (eds), Civil Litigation in China and Europe. Essays on the Role of the Judge and the Parties (Springer 2014).
Woolf, H.K. , Access to Justice, Interim Report (Lord Chancellor’s Department June 1995).
Woolf, H.K. , Access to Justice, Final Report (H.M. Stationery Office 1996).
Zuckerman, A.A.S. (ed), Civil Justice in Crisis. Comparative Perspectives of Civil Procedure (Oxford UP 2000).