English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Judicial Decision-Making from the Perspective of Institutional History. A Diachronic Comparison of Court Procedures and Amicable Settlements in the Holy Roman Empire, Prussia, and the Federal Republic of Germany . Amicable settlements were a core practice in judicial courts of the early modern period. While recent studies tend to focus on strategies of litigants, this article shifts the attention to the process of decision-making from an institutional perspective. To that end, the author examines working procedures and tools of political influencing at court using examples of civil cases at judicial courts in the Holy Roman Empire (particularly the Imperial Aulic Council), in Prussia under the reign of Frederick the Great, and in the Federal Republic of Germany. As will be shown, throughout times institutional dispositions influence the outcome of judgements and amicable settlements at least to the same degree than strategies of litigants do.

zeitschrift der savigny-stiftung für rechtsgeschichte: germanistische abteilung

Vom Reichshofrat über Cocceji zu PEBB§Y: Epochenübergreifende Überlegungen zu gerichtlichen Urteils- und Vergleichsquoten aus institutionengeschichtlicher Perspektive