Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Enforcement Systems – Differences and Similarities

View through CrossRef
Abstract In modern civil procedural law, there are different organizational structures of national civil enforcement systems. According to the principle of national procedural autonomy, each state regulates the enforcement procedure independently. Because of this, it is very difficult to talk about special systems for the civil enforcement of court decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles at the macro level. The main reason for this is the fact that the matter of enforcement procedural law was neglected for a long period of time, and the harmonization of the enforcement procedure only began to be considered in the middle of the XIX-th century. However, in general, the International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law speaks of the existence of four systems for the enforcement of court decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles, namely: 1) enforcement of decisions by courts, 2) enforcement of decisions by private enforcement bodies (bailiff system of enforcement), 3) mixed systems of enforcement and 4) administrative systems for enforcement. The system for the enforcement of decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles by courts without exceptions is specific to the Anglo-American procedural circle (common law system), while in the Romanian-German procedural circle of the civil law system the enforcement of decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles can be under the competence of the courts or under the competence of bailiffs, although combined models can also be encountered. In the Scandinavian procedural circle as a part of the civil law system, is dominant the system of enforcement of decisions by private enforcement bodies or the administrative system of enforcement. The aim of this paper is to perceive the similarities and differences between national enforcement systems analyzed at the macro level. To achieve this goal, the comparative method and the analysis method will be used.
Title: Enforcement Systems – Differences and Similarities
Description:
Abstract In modern civil procedural law, there are different organizational structures of national civil enforcement systems.
According to the principle of national procedural autonomy, each state regulates the enforcement procedure independently.
Because of this, it is very difficult to talk about special systems for the civil enforcement of court decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles at the macro level.
The main reason for this is the fact that the matter of enforcement procedural law was neglected for a long period of time, and the harmonization of the enforcement procedure only began to be considered in the middle of the XIX-th century.
However, in general, the International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law speaks of the existence of four systems for the enforcement of court decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles, namely: 1) enforcement of decisions by courts, 2) enforcement of decisions by private enforcement bodies (bailiff system of enforcement), 3) mixed systems of enforcement and 4) administrative systems for enforcement.
The system for the enforcement of decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles by courts without exceptions is specific to the Anglo-American procedural circle (common law system), while in the Romanian-German procedural circle of the civil law system the enforcement of decisions and other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles can be under the competence of the courts or under the competence of bailiffs, although combined models can also be encountered.
In the Scandinavian procedural circle as a part of the civil law system, is dominant the system of enforcement of decisions by private enforcement bodies or the administrative system of enforcement.
The aim of this paper is to perceive the similarities and differences between national enforcement systems analyzed at the macro level.
To achieve this goal, the comparative method and the analysis method will be used.

Related Results

The methodology of law enforcement policy
The methodology of law enforcement policy
The subject of the paper is methodology of law enforcement policy, elements and relevance for law enforcement activity.The main aim of the paper is to confirm or disprove the hypot...
Punishing Polluters: Trends, Local Practice, and Influences, and Their Implications for Administrative Law Enforcement in China
Punishing Polluters: Trends, Local Practice, and Influences, and Their Implications for Administrative Law Enforcement in China
Scholars and politicians often complain about how weak administrative law enforcement is in China. To better understand the challenges in law enforcement, as well as variation in a...
REKONSTRUKSI PERKARA SEBAGAI UPAYA DALAM MENGUNGKAP KEJAHATAN
REKONSTRUKSI PERKARA SEBAGAI UPAYA DALAM MENGUNGKAP KEJAHATAN
In essence, law enforcement is a process of adjustment between values, rules and real behavior patterns that aim to achieve peace, so that the main task of law enforcement itself i...
Perbandingan Kosa Kata Antara Bahasa Dentong dan Bahasa Duri (Sebuah Tinjauan Linguistik)
Perbandingan Kosa Kata Antara Bahasa Dentong dan Bahasa Duri (Sebuah Tinjauan Linguistik)
The problems of this research are (1) the relationship of similarities and similarities in the vocabulary of Dentong and Duri languages ​​(2) the relationship between sound and mea...
Financial law enforcement acts in Poland
Financial law enforcement acts in Poland
The subject. The paper is devoted to the classification of financial law enforcement acts issued in Poland.The purpose of the paper is a typological analysis of the financial law e...
Ewolucja zakresu ograniczeń egzekucji sądowej a cel postępowania egzekucyjnego
Ewolucja zakresu ograniczeń egzekucji sądowej a cel postępowania egzekucyjnego
This study is devoted to the analysis of mutual relations between the evolution of the scope of limitations (restrictions) of judicial enforcement and the purpose of the enforcemen...
Co-producing improvements in enforcement agencies efficiency to tackle illegal fishing 
Co-producing improvements in enforcement agencies efficiency to tackle illegal fishing 
Illegal fishing can undermine the sustainability of fisheries globally, threatening livelihoods and marine ecosystems. Traditional enforcement strategies struggle to cope with the ...

Back to Top