The conflicts of jurisdictions – an economic analysis of pre-trial discovery, fact gathering and cost shifting rules in the United States and Germany

Abstract

Abstract. The extension of the American rules of procedure to foreign countries undertaken by US judges has led to conflicts of jurisdiction, which could become a threat to international trade. The essay compares the systems of civil procedure in the USA and Germany and also tries to analyse and evaluate them from an economic point of view. The investigation shows that the US-American rules of pre-trial discovery and the way that the procedural and lawyers’ costs are allocated are the source of various abuses within the American legal system and for this reason are rejected internationally. The American view that regulation of lawyers’ fees, like that applying in Germany, should simply be regarded as cartels, disregards the considerable damage to third parties that the American costs rules entail. In comparison with the European systems, the American rules of procedure give rise to too many unjustified and over-expensive legal disputes. Zusammenfassung. Die von US-Richtern vorgenommene Ausdehnung amerikanischer Prozeßregeln auf das Ausland hat zu internationalen Justizkonflikten geführt, die zu einer Bedrohung des internationalen Handels werden können. Der Aufsatz vergleicht die Zivilprozeßstrukturen zwischen den USA und Deutschland und versucht diese auch aus der Sicht der Wirtschaftswissenschaften zu analysieren und zu bewerten. Die Untersuchung zeigt, daß die US-amerikanischen Regelungen der pre-trial-Discovery und der Verteilung der Prozeß- und Anwaltskosten ursächlich für verschiedene Mißstaäde im amerikanischen Justizsystem und damit deren internationale Ablehnung sind. Die amerikanische Sicht, Anwaltsgebührenordnungen nach deutschem Muster als bloße Kartelle anzusehen, übersieht die mit den amerikanischen Kostenregelungen verbundenen erheblichen Schädigungen Dritter. Die amerikanischen Prozeßregeln vemrsachen im Vergleich zu den europäischen Systemen zu viele unberechtigte und zu teure rechtliche Streitigkeiten.

Pharmaceutical Product Liability, Litigation Regimes, and the Propensity to Patent: An Empirical Firm-Level Investigation

“…The special rules on pretrial discovery index depict whether such special rules exist in the assessed legal regimes (Spears, 1980). One should note that as Adams (1995) suggests “at least in theory such special rules on pre-trial discovery should favor claimants (consumers).” Namely, in civil cases in the United States, “evidence is primarily gathered by parties using the formal investigatory pre-trial discovery” process (Adams, 1995). The current U.S. Federal Rules were originally adopted in 1938 and provide extremely broad discovery provisions, requiring parties to disclose “ any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 26(b) (I) “Discovery Scope and Limits”).…”

“…The current U.S. Federal Rules were originally adopted in 1938 and provide extremely broad discovery provisions, requiring parties to disclose “ any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 26(b) (I) “Discovery Scope and Limits”). A party who strongly believes it has been wronged can “file a claim even if it has hardly any evidence, and use the evidence gathered during pre-trial discovery to build up their case” (Adams, 1995). In the United States, disclosure is compulsory and has an extremely broad scope (De Lummen, 2013).…”

“…In the United States, disclosure is compulsory and has an extremely broad scope (De Lummen, 2013). Two key characteristics of pretrial discovery are that “(a) it takes place, for the most part, extra-judicially with minimal court intervention and (b) a party can actually force the other to provide them evidence, whether or not it is of genuine interest or relevance to the case” (Adams, 1995). However, one should note that “in general such a pre-trial disclosure or discovery rule does not exist in civil law countries” (Adams, 1995).…”

“…The special rules on pre trial discovery index depict whether such special rules exist in the assessed legal regimes (Spears, 1980). One should note that as Adams (1995) suggests "at least in theory such special rules on pretrial discovery should favor claimants (consumers)." Namely, in civil cases in the United States, "evidence is primarily gathered by parties using the formal investigatory pretrial discovery" process (Adams, 1995).…”