Sabrina Defabritiis, ‘Lost in
translation: Oral advocacy in a land without binding precedent’, now
available on SSRN and forthcoming in the Suffolk
Transnational Law Review, might be of interest:
Robert Frost first
famously penned “Poetry is what gets lost in translation.” In the world of
advocacy, persuasion is what gets lost in translation. This article examines
the distinctions in the common law and civil law methods of legal reasoning. It
analyzes why, in form and substance, the traditional common law oral argument
methods are neither effective nor persuasive when presented in a civil law
jurisdiction. Although the common law and civil law legal traditions share
similar social objectives, arguing based on stare decisis is
incompatible with the Code-based method applied by civil law courts. This
article explores how to transfer common law advocacy skills to create an
effective civil law oral argument. By making this transition, a common law
advocate will be able to garner a greater awareness of the civil law system,
including an understanding of the rules that govern the court or tribunal that
will be hearing the argument, an appreciation for the role of the judge hearing
the argument, and an appreciation for the role of scholars in the civil law
system. As a result, common law practitioners can hone their ability to
effectively craft a persuasive civil law argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment