Courts as Rhetorical Actors: A Rhetorical Analysis of Judicial Conflict Avoidance

Jochen von Bernstorff; Olaf Kramer; Johannes Saurer; Stefan Thomas

doi:10.17104/0044-2348-2021-4-1001

Contents
- Chapter Expand | CollapseAuthorsPage
- Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
- 885–894 Comment 885–894
  - The Triumph of European Union Law in International Investment Law – The Phenomenon, the Problems, and the Solution Martin Jarrett Martin Jarrett
- 895–1058 Abhandlungen 895–1058
  - 895–916 ‘To me, fair friend, you can never be old’, William Shakespeare, ‘Sonnet 104’: ECHR at 70 Rudolf Bernhardt Lecture, 202 Başak Çalı Başak Çalı 895–916
  - 917–936 The Euro Group’s Informality and locus standi before the European Court of Justice: Council v. K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others Giacomo Rugge Giacomo Rugge 917–936
  - 937–968 Moral Damages as an ‘Exceptional’ Remedy in International Investment Law – Re-Connecting Practice with General International Law Robert Christoph Stendel Robert Christoph Stendel 937–968
  - 969–1000 A New Frontier in International Investment Law: Adjudication of Host Citizen-Investor Disputes? Martin Jarrett Martin Jarrett 969–1000
  - 1001–1032 Courts as Rhetorical Actors: A Rhetorical Analysis of Judicial Conflict Avoidance Jochen von Bernstorff, Olaf Kramer, Johannes Saurer, Stefan Thomas Jochen von Bernstorff, Olaf Kramer, Johannes Saurer, Stefan Thomas 1001–1032
  - 1033–1058 Staatsbürgerschaft als Ware – von Goldenen Pässen und der Europäischen Union Julien Berger Julien Berger 1033–1058
- 1059–1090 Buchbesprechungen 1059–1090
  - 1059–1064 Tzouvala, Ntina: Capitalism as Civilisation – A History of International Law Idriss Paul-Armand Fofana Idriss Paul-Armand Fofana 1059–1064
  - 1065–1070 De Búrca, Gráinne: Refraiming Human Rights in a Turbulent Era Deborah Whitehall Deborah Whitehall 1065–1070
  - 1071–1074 Mac Giolla Chríost, Diarmait/Bonotti, Matteo: Brexit, Language Policy and Linguistic Diversity Manfred Herbert Manfred Herbert 1071–1074
  - 1075–1080 Zeisberg, Marie-Christine: Ein Rohstoffvölkerrecht für das 21. Jahrhundert Ludwig Gramlich Ludwig Gramlich 1075–1080
  - 1081–1090 Kulick, Andreas/Goldhammer, Michael (Hrsg.): Der Terrorist als Feind? – Personalisierung im Polizei- und Völkerrecht Till Holterhus Till Holterhus 1081–1090
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY-SA Access

Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht / Heidelberg Journal of International Law , page 1001 - 1032

Courts as Rhetorical Actors: A Rhetorical Analysis of Judicial Conflict Avoidance

Autoren

Jochen von Bernstorff Olaf Kramer Johannes Saurer Stefan Thomas

DOI
- doi.org/10.17104/0044-2348-2021-4-1001
- ISSN: 0044-2348
- ISSN online: 2942-3562
Abstract

The paper starts from the assumption that there is a body of case-law on the German, the European Union (EU) level, and on the international level that is characterised by strategies of judicial avoidance. Courts for various reasons sometimes avoid deciding the substantive legal issues advanced by the parties to a conflict or put before them as a legal question in advisoryproceedings. The phenomenon is multifaceted. It can be observed in different legal contexts, in different countries, and branches of the law. From this perspective judicial avoidance is an important, yet scholarly neglected, element of judicial practice. As the paper demonstrates, it can be detected and categorised by employing the analytical tools of rhetorical science. This namely involves insights resulting from rhetorical research on ‘avoidance strategies’ in various forms of human and organisational communication. The central hypothesis of this paper therefore is that courts can be found to employ a sophisticated toolkit of classical rhetorical practices in order to avoid in their decision a ruling on focal legal issues of a dispute. The crossjurisdictional set of rhetorical practices, which the article traces in the practice of various selected high profile courts, goes well beyond the emanations of classic Western separation of powers-doctrines of ‘judicial self-restraint’, ‘political questions’, or the ‘margin of appreciation’.
Share