Digital Commons Network^™

Japan's New Lay Judge System: Deliberative Democracy In Action?, Zachary Corey, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Reforming Knowledge? A Socio-Legal Critique Of The Legal Education Reforms In Japan, Annelise Riles, Takashi Uchida

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article critiques the current Japanese legal education reforms, modeled largely on the United States, by proposing a socio-technical framework for analyzing the distribution of legal expertise in a given society. On one side of the spectrum is the "monocentric" model of legal expertise, in which expertise is monopolized by the profession and legal literacy is low. On the other side of the spectrum is the "polycentric" model of legal expertise, in which a range of social and institutional actors share responsibility for legal expertise and legal literacy is high. If the U.S. is a more monocentric system, the Japanese …

The Anti-Network: Private Global Governance, Legal Knowledge, And The Legitimacy Of The State, Annelise Riles

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Global private law has become the source of both anxiety and euphoria. Inherent in this fascination is the assumption that global private law threatens the legitimacy of the state by taking over its functions through new techniques of governance. In this article, I build upon research in one arena of global private governance, the production of legal documentation for the global swap markets, to challenge the most prominent assumptions about private law beyond the state. I argue that rather than focusing on how global private law is or is not an artifact of state power, a body of private norms, …

A Global Law Of Jurisdiction And Judgments: Views From The United States And Japan, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Japanese and U.S. legal systems, despite surprisingly similar doctrine and outlook on matters of jurisdiction and judgments, often clash: jurisdictions overlap and judgments may go unrespected, while parallel proceedings persist. The current outlook for harmonization through a multilateral Hague convention of general scope is bleak. These two countries are, however, ideally situated to reach a highly feasible bilateral agreement that would provide a better tomorrow in which jurisdiction was allocated appropriately and judgments were respected accordingly.

Standards Of Proof In Japan And The United States, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article treats the striking divergence between Japanese and U.S. civil cases as to standards of proof. The civil-law Japan requires proof to a high probability similar to the criminal standard, while the common-law United States requires only that the burdened party prove the fact to be more likely than not. This divergence not only entails great practical consequences, but also suggests a basic difference in attitudes toward the process of trial.

As to the historical causation of the difference in standards of proof, civil-law and common-law standards diverged in the late eighteenth century, probably because of one system’s French …