when i askedHeikki Pihlajamäki how it was possible in that vast Swedish country and the Swedish Baltic provinces, where learned jurists were rare who could help a party to take a correct appellation at the conditions of the learned procedural law, he answered that in this part of Europe, it was sufficient to give a slip of paper denominating the demand to correct the judgment, if someone did not agree to it. The learned procedural law actually missed such an informality.3 The slip of paper mentioned by Heikki might be the lodging of the appeal (Einlegung der Appellation) with the judex a quo. The other form of appeal in the presence of a notary and two witnesses which was given to thejudex a quo, was unknown in Swedish law because there were hardly any notaries. Very important were the time-limits for the compliance of the procedure at the judex ad quem, the so calledfatalia. These conditions were all scrutinized by the Imperial Chamber in a special part of the procedure, which was called theextrajudicialiter. It rejected the reception of the appeal if one of its conditions was missing. In that case the office of the Imperial Chamber did not collect the memorandums in a file. Therefore we don’t know the number of thea limine refused appeals. Wolfgang Prange at least partially enlightened these numbers of undetected cases.4 He as the most competent expert of the records of Schleswig-Holstein could find out that up to 1550 five appeals were brought from Holstein to the new Imperial Chamber Court. Yet they could not be found in the collection of files of the Imperial Chamber Court as the judges had refused them. Prange could point out that these five cases all had failed in the same way: they had come up for trial and had been decided at first discussion and then the judges could correct or complete their own judgment. So Leuterationwas not a speciality of Saxony, but it was part of the learned procedural law, and could be found in all places where the learned law was practised. 3 To the formalities of appeal: Bettina Dick, Die Entwicklung des Kameralprozesses nach den Ordnungen von 1495 bis 1555. In: Quellen und Forschungen zur höchsten Gerichtsbarkeit imAlten Reich vol. 10, 1981, p. 198. 4 Wolfgang Prange, Schleswig-Holstein und das Reichskammergericht in den ersten fünzig Jahren. In: Veröffentlichungen der Gesellschaft für Reichskammergerichtsforschung in Wetzlar, Heft 22, 1998, p. 22. 315 2.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=