Patterns of Preference for Dispute Resolution in Poland

• Autorzy: Jacek Kurczewski , Małgorzata Fuszara
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper presents information from a nationally representative Polish survey in 2014 on the types of dispute resolution preferred by the respondents. It places the findings in the conceptual background of studies conducted since the mid-1970s in Polish sociology of law on the subject of disputes and the use of the courts. The purpose of the analysis was to identify the more general types of dispute settlement preferred in the popular legal culture in Poland, and the socio-demographic variables that correlate significantly with these preferences. The significance of social position, as measured by a version of the Center-Periphery index, has also been confirmed. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Research results; Survey research; Judicature

PL

Wyniki badań; Badania sondażowe; Sądownictwo

• Czasopismo: Polish Sociological Review
• Rocznik: 2017
• Numer: nr 4 (200)
• Strony: 505--522

Twórcy

autor

Jacek Kurczewski

• University of Warsaw

autor

Małgorzata Fuszara

• University of Warsaw

Bibliografia

• Anagnostou, D. 2014. "Law and Rights as Opportunity and Promise for Minorities in Europe? Concluding Observations and Research Agendas," in: D. Anagnostou (ed.), Rights and Courts in Pursuit of Social Change. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• Banaszak, L. A., Beckwith, K., & Rucht, D. 2003. Women's Movements Facing the Reconfigured State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Barlow, A., Hunter, R., Smithson, J., and Ewing, J. 2017. "Mapping Paths to Family Justice," Palgrave Socio Legal Studies.
• Black, D. 1976. The Behavior of Law. New York: Academic Press.
• Blankenburg, E. 1991. Dutch Legal Culture. Amsterdam: Kluwer.
• Braithwaite, J. 2003. Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Domingo, P., & O' Neil, T. 2014. The Politics of Legal Empowerment. Legal Mobilisation Strategies and Implications for Development, June 2014, https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9008.pdf
• Felstiner, W. 1975. "Avoidance as Dispute Processing; An Elaboration," Law and Society Review 4 (9): 695- 704.
• Fuszara, M. 1989. Codzienne konflikty i odświętna sprawiedliwość. Warsaw: IPSiR UW.
• Fuszara, M. 2016. "Dignity, Honour and Reputation," Societas/Communitas 2(22): 105-132.
• Fuszara, M., and Kurczewski, J. 2009. "Disputes and Courts in Poland 25 Years Later," Societas/Communitas 7(1): 101-134.
• Genn, H. 1993. "Tribunals and Informal Justice," The Modern Law Review 56(3): 393-411.
• Genn, H. 1999. Paths to Justice: What People Do and Think About Going to Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• Gibson, J. L., and Caldeira, G. A. 2009. Citizems, Courts, and Confirmations: Positivity Theory and the Judgments of the American People. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Kawashima, T. 1963. "Dispute Resolution in Contemporary Japan," in: A. von Mehren (ed.), Law in Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Kurczewski, J. 1982. Spór i sądy. Warszawa: IPSiR UW.
• Kurczewski, J. 1993. Resurrection of Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kurczewski, J. 2001. Sociology of Law in Poland, The American Sociologist 32 (2): 85-98.
• Kurczewski, J. 2013. Adam Podgorecki's Empirical Theory of Law, Societas/Communitas: 79-96.
• Kurczewski, J., & Frieske, K. 1978. "The Social Conciliatory Commissions in Poland: a Case Study of Nonauthoritative and Conciliatory Dispute Resolution as an Approach to Access to Justice," in: Mauro Cappelletti and John Weisner (eds.), Access to Justice: Promising Institutions. Milan: A. Giuffre; Alphenaandenrijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff; V. 2. Book 1, pp. 156-427.
• Kurczewski, J., and Fuszara, M. (eds.). 2004. Polskie spory i sądy. Warszawa: ISNS UW.
• Kurczewski, J., and Fuszara, M. 2017. How People Use the Courts. Frankfurt a/M: Peter Lang.
• Kurczewski, J., and Orzechowski, P. 2016. Dispute Settlement Patterns in Public Opinion. Four Local Studies of Transformation, Societas/Communitas 17(2): 253-280.
• LPRS. 2017. Ministry of Justice. Surveys and Insight. Analytical Services. Legal Problem and Resolution Survey, 2014-2015. UK Data Service. SN: 8169, http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-8169-l.
• Motyka, K. 1993. Wpływ Leona Petrażyckiego na polską teorie i socjologie prawa. Lublin: RW KUL.
• Motyka, K. 1999. Adam Podgorecki's Arguments with Petrazycki, Proceedings of IASS 2: 31-45.
• Murayama, M. 2011. Is There a Japanese Way of Dispute Resolution?, Societas/Communitas 12(2): 137-154.
• Murayama, M. 2016. What Counts in Navigating Behavior. Do General Attitudes Matter? Societas/Communitas 17(2): 235-252.
• Petrażycki, L. 1960. Teoria prawa i państwa w związku z teorią moralności. Warszawa.
• Pleasance, P., Balmer, N. J., Sandefur, R. L. 2013. Paths to Justice: A Past, Present and Future Roadmap. Report prepared under a grant from the Nuffield Foundation, http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/mes/PTJ Roadmap NUFFIELD Published.pdf.
• Podgórecki, A. 1980. Unrecognized Father of Sociology of Law: Leon Petrazycki, Law and Society Review 15: 183-202.
• Podgórecki, A. 1991. Sociological Theory of Law. Milano: Giuffre.
• Wiberg, H., van der Veer, C. G., van den Berg, H., Hartmann, A., Galtung, J., & Diez-Nicolas, J. 2009. The Centre-periphery Theory Revisited: A Holistic Multidimensional Approach of Social Behaviour, Social Change and Social Conflicts, in: K. van der Veer, A. Hartmann, H. van der Berg, J. Diez- Nicolas, J. Galtung, & H. Wiberg (eds.), Multidimensional Social Science. An Inclusive Approach to Social Position and Inequality. Amsterdam: Rozenberg, pp. 161-166.
• Zawadzki, S., and Kubicki, L. (eds.). 1970. Udział ławników w postępowaniu karnym. Opinie a rzeczywistość. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Prawnicze.
• Ziegert, K. A. 1997. Adam Podgorecki's Sociology of Law: The Invisible Factors of the Functioning of Law Made Visible, Law and Society 12(1): 151-180.