courts of appeal in norway courts (ting/byting) before they could be appealed to the district court.36 Thus, the lagting became court of appeal only. The implementation of the new hierarchical legal order did, however, carry with it a number of serious problems. First, the nobility was not willing to give up their privilege to take their actions to a court of higher reputation.40 Second, and more importantly, the command to deal with all cases on the local level did not solve the underlying problem, that is, the case at hand,…is it our royal will that no lawman from this day onwards relegates any case to other lawmen or judges”). This rule was later codified in Christian IV’s Norwegian Code of 1604 book I chap. 4: “Laugrettemend skulle dømme om alle de sager, som dennem til tingstuffwer ere steffnd … Ingen som tilnæffnis at dømme, vdi slig eller andre sage, maa sig der fra sige, men endelig vere forpligt at dømme, paa det at retten maa haffue sin fremgang.” [The jury of lay judges shall rule on all cases, which are made pending…Nobody who iss assigned to judge, in such or other cases, is allowed to withdraw from this duty, but he is obliged to rule so that the law can proceed].Another important decree which contributed to this development was the Lagmannsforordning from 6 August 1607. 36 Cf. note 31 above. In more detail, see Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen 2014a p. 156; Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen 2010b p. 197 f. 37 Norwegian Code 1-6-8: “Soerenskrifvernis Domme indstefnis til Laugtinget. Bytingsdomme indstefnis for Raadstueretten; Raadstue-Domme indstefnis for Laugtinget, eller hour-somhelst sær Privilegie derom tilholder, lige for Overhoffretten.”; translation: “Rulings by the Sorenskriver are to be appealled to the Lagmansrett. Rulings by the city-court are to be appealed to the city-council, and the city-councils verdict can either be appealed to the Lagting or, in case it has been granted a special privilege, directly to the Overhoffrett.” This privilege was usually calledLaugtingsret. Cf. Nørregaard, Lauritz 1790 p. 170. 38 For an overview over the different types of extraordinary courts and their appellation instances, see Nissen, Martinus 1770 part II chap 5 § 1 ff. p. 150 ff.; Brorson, Christian 1797 vol. II p. 131 ff. 39 For more detail, see Hansen, Torleif 1993 p. 44 ff. 40 This was expressed in a letter written to the king at the occasion of the enthronement of the infant king ChristianIV, but was rejected by the royal administration. Cf. Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen 2010b p. 199. 290 In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries we have to distinguish between two categories of courts of appeal: The ordinary appellate-courts and the extraordinary courts of appeal. The ordinary courts were the “Lag- or Laugting”, or in bigger market towns the city council court or “Raadstuerett” whose rulings again could be appealed to the Laugting.37 Extraordinary courts of appeal could be further divided in courts with special personal and material competences.38 It would go too far to introduce all alternative courts or other organs with judicial competences. It may be enough to mention that these courts as a rule were given a similar appellate-structure as the ordinary courts of justice.39
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=