heikki pihlajamäki mentions in his article,1 that theLeuterationhad existed in criminal procedure as well as in the Saxon law and was probably transferred from there to Sweden. Point- 1. ing out that theleuteratio in Germany is only found in the Saxon law, he relates to the results of German research. Yet now I found out that this institution, though never mentioned in any order of the Imperial Chamber Court, could be found as well in the procedural practice of the Imperial Chamber Court. This discovery, hidden in a book, no one would have expected it there,2 shows that also the Imperial Chamber (er) läuterte or declarierte judgment of its own. At this point, I want to draw special attention to this statement. Also I want to apologize for referring to results of my own research, yet they are important for understanding this point of view. If theLeuterationwas not only a speciality of the Saxon procedural law, but was a general constituent part of the common procedural practice, the question must be asked in a different way or not at all. It would be preferable to ask why it was necessary at that time that law courts could rectify their own judgments. Here you will find a weak point of the procedural practice. The plaintiff in a civil process was not obliged to request his demands in a precise application form which would be base of judge sentences, but when missing such a precise application form the judge had to find out the demands in the memorandums. In this way judges could ignore some points or disregard them, and so avoiding too difficult problems. In such cases the plaintiff could request for Leuteration suum cuique tribuere 1 Heikki Pihlajamäki, The Court of Appeal as Legal Transfer: The Svea and Dorpat Courts Compared. In: Mia Korpiola (ed.), The Svea Court of Appeal in the Early Modern Period: Historical Reinterpretations and New Perspectives, Rättshistoriska studier, vol. 26, Stockholm: Olin Foundation, 2014, p. 238. 2 Bernhard Diestelkamp, Ein Kampf um Freiheit und Recht, 2012, p. 72. 314 Professor dr. iur., dr. jur.h.c. Bernhard Diestelkamp, Frankfurt/Main Please permit me two complementary remarks to this very interesting lecture:
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=