Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Law in China

ISSN 1673-3428

ISSN 1673-3541(Online)

CN 11-5742/D

Postal Subscription Code 80-981

Front. Law China    2018, Vol. 13 Issue (1) : 21-33    https://doi.org/10.3868/s050-007-018-0003-0
Orginal Article
THE FORM OF REFORM: REVISITING THE CHOICE AMONG A CREED, A CODE, AND A CATALOGUE
Edward Imwinkelried()
J. D. University of San Francisco, San Francisco, USA; Professor, University of California, Davis School of Law, Davis, California 95616.
 Download: PDF(151 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In the past, international Evidence law reformers have focused primarily on substantive evidentiary doctrines. However, for reforms to be effective, the courts and legislatures must state the revised doctrines in a form that promotes the overall objectives of the legal system. The basic choice facing reformers is among a creed identifying broad goals, a code stating flexible principles, and a catalogue prescribing detailed rules. In the past, especially in the United States, there was a consensus among Evidence scholars that the code format is preferable. However, if a key objective of a national legal system is to encourage pretrial disposition of cases, the courts and legislatures should give serious thought to utilizing a catalogue format. That format is especially attractive in the doctrinal areas such as privilege in which evidentiary rules are intended to affect primary behavior outside the courtroom.

Keywords evidence reform      evidence legislation      evidence rules      creed      code      catalogue     
Issue Date: 23 April 2018
 Cite this article:   
Edward Imwinkelried. THE FORM OF REFORM: REVISITING THE CHOICE AMONG A CREED, A CODE, AND A CATALOGUE[J]. Front. Law China, 2018, 13(1): 21-33.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/flc/EN/10.3868/s050-007-018-0003-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/flc/EN/Y2018/V13/I1/21
[1] WANG Chih-Cheng, MENG Yunuo. The Modernization of Trustee's Fiduciary Duties in the Chinese Trust Law: A Perspective from the Uniform Trust Code in the United States[J]. Front. Law China, 2020, 15(2): 169-192.
[2] BAI Jiang. A General Clause of Punitive Damages Should Be Established in China's Future Civil Code[J]. Front. Law China, 2019, 14(3): 387-437.
[3] Suzannah Linton. TOWARDS A GLOBAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF CAPTURED ENEMY FIGHTERS[J]. Front. Law China, 2017, 12(2): 217-277.
[4] Liming Wang, Youjun Zhou. Progressing with the Reform and Opening up: Retrospective of China’s Civil Law (1978–2008)[J]. Front Law Chin, 2010, 5(2): 165-187.
[5] LIU Renwen. Deliberation on adjusting Chinese criminal law structure[J]. Front Law Chin, 2008, 3(4): 477-493.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed