Clement Salung Petersen

A Comparative Perspective on Recent Nordic Reforms of Civil Justice

The civil justice systems of Denmark, Norway and Sweden have much in common even though they, unlike other important areas of law, have not been subject to a formal Nordic legislative cooperation. This paper explores recent reforms of civil justice in Denmark, Norway and Sweden from a comparative perspective. The purpose is to identify and compare the general purposes and fundamental values, as well as some important general principles behind these Nordic civil justice systems, and to discuss to what extent they reflect a common Nordic approach to civil justice. The analyses show that these civil justice systems today generally aim to fulfill the same purposes and are essentially based on the same fundamental values and general principles and that these purposes, values and principles largely reflect a common Nordic approach to civil justice.

Denmark: Foreign Law in Danish Civil Litigation: A Pragmatic Approach

This chapter concerns the treatment of foreign law in Danish civil litigation. It first highlights some essential features of Danish civil litigation that are generally relevant for the application of (any) law and the pragmatic Danish understanding of the “nature” of foreign law. On this background, it analyses the principles for application and ascertainment of foreign law as well as the consequences of failure to establish relevant foreign law.

Access to the Danish Civil Justice System: Recent Reforms and Current Challenges

This paper explores the efforts made to provide better access to the Danish civil justice system, including schemes for legal aid and advice, representation of “diffuse interests”, changes in forms of procedure and the structure of courts and ADR. After providing an overview of the most significant of these efforts and recent Danish reforms, the paper identifies and discusses some of the significant current challenges related to providing access to the Danish civil justice system. The analyses suggest, inter alia, that there is a need for a comprehensive general review of the Danish schemes for legal aid and advice.

Treaties in Domestic Civil Litigation: Jura Novit Curia ?

Many international treaties regulate relations between states and private individuals (vertical treaty rules) and transnational relations between private individuals (transnational treaty rules), and domestic civil litigation often plays an important role in the enforcement of such rules. The actual impact of treaty rules in domestic civil litigation depends inter alia on the procedural principles governing the judicial application of law. In the European legal tradition of civil law, these principles are often expressed by the Latin adages “jura novit curia” (the court knows the law) and “da mihi factum, dabo tibi jus” (give me the facts, I give you the law). This article analyses how such procedural principles affect the obligations of domestic courts to apply vertical and transnational treaty rules in civil litigation and how, at the same time, international law can influence these domestic procedural principles in ways which create a complex relationship between international law and domestic civil procedure law.

On Law and Policy in a European and European Union Patent Court (EEUPC) - What Will it do to Patent Law and What Will Patent Law do to it?

On 4 December 2009, the European Council unanimously adopted conclusions on an enhanced patent system in Europe, which inter alia intends to establish a new EU patent as well as a new common patent judiciary – the European and European Union Patent Court (EEUPC). The EEUPC will constitute a new sui generis, transnational court system with exclusive jurisdiction in respect of civil litigation related to the infringement and validity of European patents and EU patent. This paper considers this proposal for the establishment of the EEUPC under two basic observations, namely that substantive law requires legal institutions, which support the purposes and policies underlying the substantive law in question, and that legal institutions affect the law. The first observation leads to a discussion of the requirements which a common judiciary in the European patent system should satisfy and different models for the institutional design of such a judiciary. The second observation leads to a discussion of how the EEUPC may affect the European patent system. It is concluded that the need for a common judiciary in the European patent system may be satisfied in different ways and that the EEUPC may not be the optimum solution.