Inside post-socialist courts: the determinants of adjudicatory outcomes in Slovenian commercial disputes

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Despite the judiciary's central role in the capitalist market system, micro-level empirical analyses of courts in post-socialist countries are remarkably rare. This paper draws on a unique hand-collected dataset of commercial claims filed at Slovenian courts to examine the determinants of two salient adjudicatory outcomes: whether a case was resolved via trial or settlement and if the case was tried, whether the plaintiff was awarded the initial claim. Consistent with the divergent expectations theory of litigation, we find that trial-based resolution is more likely when the case is complex and less likely when parties use mediation. Addressing sample selection and endogeneity concerns, we show that defendant's legal representation, plaintiff's profitability, and, importantly, court identity are robust predictors of plaintiff victory at trial. Thus, more than two decades after the start of transition in Slovenia, the judicial system is still a source of legal inconsistency and uncertainty. Terms of use: Documents inJEL-Code: K400, K410, P370, D020.

Backlogs and litigation rates: Testing congestion equilibrium across European judiciaries

“…From a theoretical point of view, we expect a judiciary to be independent. Nevertheless, a lack of independence is an enduring concern in many European judiciaries (Grajzl, Dimitrova-Grajzl and Zajc 2016). Therefore, an important advantage of our model is that it allows us to test whether the anticipated time effect that discourages litigation is contingent upon the extent to which a country's judiciary is independent.…”

Are lawyers worth the cost? Legal counsel in environmental criminal court cases

“…The vast majority of past empirical research studying the effect of legal representation on case outcomes focuses on common law countries, with the largest proportion using US data [see Sandefur (2010) and Greiner and Pattanayak (2012) for overviews] and only a limited fraction using UK data (e.g., Genn and Genn, 1989;Latreille et al, 2005;Pleasence and Balmer, 2007). Studies set in a civil law country are extremely scarce, with the notable exceptional studies of Vietnam (Huang, 2008;Huang et al, 2014) and Slovenia (Grajzl et al, 2016). Furthermore, these previous studies cover a wide variety of courts and proceedings, such as juvenile courts (Clarke and Koch, 1980;Feld, 1989), tax courts (Lederman and Hrung, 2006), administrative tribunals (Genn and Genn, 1989;Monsma and Lempert, 1992), housing courts (Seron et al, 2001), constitutional civil rights cases (Schwab and Eisenberg, 1988), civil cases (Huang, 2008) and bail hearings (Colbert et al, 2002).…”

Litigation and the Timing of Settlement: Evidence from Commercial Disputes

“…This overview in part draws on the discussion of aspects of the Slovenian judicial system and civil procedure in Dimitrova-Grajzl et al (2014) andGrajzl et al (2015).…”