THE PERSISTENCE OF BOUNDARIES: A REPLY TO ROSEN-ZVI AND FISHER

For those who have studied the blurry distinction between the civil law and the criminal law, it is natural to consider jettisoning the procedural divide between the two. Almost none of the literature on the subject, though, describes how the two bodies of law could be merged, or even takes the stan...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Virginia law review 2008-01, Vol.94, p.75
Main Author: Blenkinsopp, Alexander J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Civil law
Civil procedure
Criminal law
Sanctions
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:For those who have studied the blurry distinction between the civil law and the criminal law, it is natural to consider jettisoning the procedural divide between the two. Almost none of the literature on the subject, though, describes how the two bodies of law could be merged, or even takes the stance that they should be merged. Rather, scholars have tended to look for new standards or tests to help place a sanction within one of the two existing categories, to enhance the procedural protections available in certain civil proceedings, or to propose a new additional category for hybrid sanctions. Professors Issachar Rosen-Zvi and Talia Fisher make a valuable contribution to the discussion by finally advancing a plausible way to dispense with the criminal-civil procedural bifurcation. They propose making procedural protections contingent solely upon the severity of the sanction and upon the symmetry (or lack thereof) between the adversarial parties in the proceeding.
ISSN:1942-9967