the legacy of the parliament of paris parts of France, the penal repression smoothed in the second part of the eighteenth century and there was no death penalty decided in 1788! Even if the Parlement defend the privileges of the nobility, especially against taxation, it was not closed to the ideas of reforming law according the ideas of natural reason. Whereas theParlement continued not to give the reasons of its rulings, a legal review called theGazette des Tribunaux(and created by an advocate called Mars) published some summaries of the decisions and some extracts of the conclusions (requisitoires) of the members of the public ministry.Based on the analysis of the different sources of law, like the pleadings of Daguesseau published during the eighteenth century as a model of judicial style, these conclusions have probably inspired the writing of reasons by the Tribunal de cassationand by all French courts after a 1790 statute requiring that legal basis were written in all the judgements. Despite the deep break between the Ancien Régime and the post-revolutionary France, our judiciary has thus kept something of the legal culture of the Parlement. It is a challenge for legal historians to explain how this French style could be implemented, whereas the formulas of the medieval Olimlike considerato quod or attento qudod were forgotten for a long time. I suggest that we have to be more attentive to this kind of continuity rather than denouncing the purported survival of a political spirit of domination from the French judges. 128 SUUM CUIQUE TRIBUERE Legal Contexts, Judicial Archetypes and Deep-Structures Regarding Courts of Appeal and Judiciaries from Early Modern to Late Modern Europe
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=