Challenges to the Methodology and Construction of Substantive Jurisprudence from a Procedural Perspective
Under modern jurisprudence,despite the rapid development of both,there is yet to be a sufficient academic connection between civil substantive jurisprudence and civil procedure jurisprudence.Substantive jurisprudence at this stage remains a monophyletic and self-contained system of Pandekten Jurisprudence from Roman law,oblivious to procedural law theories that have formed their own independent legal system.Consequently,substantive law theories suffer flaws,distortions,and undue expansions in their academic scope.The main causes of these issues can be broken down into the following:Firstly,modern private jurisprudence abandoned the standard of review aspect of substantive law and completely reduced it to a theory of social norms;Secondly,modern private jurisprudence has inherited the theory of actio with the concept of"claim"of a private law nature,but abandoned its procedural elements;Thirdly,modern private jurisprudence does not incorporate into its doctrine the"adjudicative effect",which has an impact on private law relations;Fourth,substantive law scholars share no clear understanding about the"vindication of rights"through litigation.The world of law consists of substantive law and procedural law.With respective academic scopes,they should complement and integrate with each other,thereby constituting the entire system of jurisprudence.To break down the self-contained systems of substantive and procedural jurisprudence,there is a need to incorporate substantive legal theories with procedural law for a framework that recognizes the coexistence of substantive and procedural law.Likewise,it is also necessary to establish theories within substantive law on its integration with procedural law.
万方数据
维普
