Notes for the study of sentencing in the ordinary civil process since the reception of common law until the Civil Procedure Law 1881

Abstract

Although prestigious authors reported in their works on the practical identity existing between our current civil procedure and that of common law, it is also true that we lacked rigorous research carried out with the care that the subject deserves on the different phases of the procedure and more specifically on the judgement. Certainly, some works deserve special attention, such as the now classic work of Giuseppe Salvioli, that carried out by Giuseppe Chiovenda, that of Filippo Vasalli, or that of Filippo Ranieri. In Spain, with the exception of the work by Joaquín Llubell Tusset, which carries out a historical study of the motivation of the canonical sentence, only monographs can be found which deal with excessively specific aspects because they refer to very short periods of time and are generally centred on the 19th century. Among this small number of works, the most important are those by Manuel Ortells Ramos , Ramón O'Callaghan , Joaquín Menéndez-Pidal y de Montes , Manuel Ortiz de Zúñiga and Laureano de Arrieta, all of them referring to the subject of the motivation of the sentence, the subject which has given rise to the greatest abundance of writings; To these should be added Pedro Gotarredona's work on the process of voting on judgments in collegiate bodies according to the Civil Procedure Act of 1855 and Seijas' work on the registration of judgments.