Judges Cognition and Market Order

We argue that during the crystallization of common and civil law in the 19th century, the optimal degree of discretion in judicial rulemaking, albeit influenced by the comparative advantages of both legislative and judicial rulemaking, was mainly determined by the anti-market biases of the judiciary...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores Principales: Andonova, V., Arruñada, B.
Formato: Artículo (Article)
Lenguaje:Inglés (English)
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/1992/46791
id ir-1992-46791
recordtype dspace
spelling ir-1992-467912020-11-04T20:23:15Z Judges Cognition and Market Order Andonova, V. Arruñada, B. Legal systems Institutional development Law enforcement We argue that during the crystallization of common and civil law in the 19th century, the optimal degree of discretion in judicial rulemaking, albeit influenced by the comparative advantages of both legislative and judicial rulemaking, was mainly determined by the anti-market biases of the judiciary. The different degrees of judicial discretion adopted in both legal traditions were thus optimally adapted to different circumstances, mainly rooted in the unique, market-friendly, evolutionary transition enjoyed by English common law as opposed to the revolutionary environment of the civil law. On the Continent, constraining judicial discretion was essential for enforcing freedom of contract and establishing a market economy. 2020-10-01T16:42:30Z 2020-10-01T16:42:30Z 2008 article publishedVersion http://hdl.handle.net/1992/46791 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=848368 eng openAccess application/pdf instname:Universidad de los Andes reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca
institution Universidad de los Andes
collection DSpace
language Inglés (English)
topic Legal systems
Institutional development
Law enforcement
spellingShingle Legal systems
Institutional development
Law enforcement
Andonova, V.
Arruñada, B.
Judges Cognition and Market Order
description We argue that during the crystallization of common and civil law in the 19th century, the optimal degree of discretion in judicial rulemaking, albeit influenced by the comparative advantages of both legislative and judicial rulemaking, was mainly determined by the anti-market biases of the judiciary. The different degrees of judicial discretion adopted in both legal traditions were thus optimally adapted to different circumstances, mainly rooted in the unique, market-friendly, evolutionary transition enjoyed by English common law as opposed to the revolutionary environment of the civil law. On the Continent, constraining judicial discretion was essential for enforcing freedom of contract and establishing a market economy.
format Artículo (Article)
author Andonova, V.
Arruñada, B.
author_facet Andonova, V.
Arruñada, B.
author_sort Andonova, V.
title Judges Cognition and Market Order
title_short Judges Cognition and Market Order
title_full Judges Cognition and Market Order
title_fullStr Judges Cognition and Market Order
title_full_unstemmed Judges Cognition and Market Order
title_sort judges cognition and market order
publishDate 2020
url http://hdl.handle.net/1992/46791
_version_ 1705934510683586560
score 11,828437