You are looking at 1 - 1 of 1 items

  • Author or Editor: Juan A. Obarrio x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Aniceto Masferrer and Juan A. Obarrio

The chapter explains how in the Spanish territories, the ius commune, due to its imperium rationis, turned into the most appropriate means to supply the gaps and contradictions of the iura propia. Both scholarly works and legal practice shows the relevant role of the ius commune throughout Western history. Iura propria fell short in providing legal rules to be used by judges in adjudicating legal disputes, and judges resorted to the communis opinio doctorum, looking for the rules which both filled in the gaps of the ius proprium and conferred legal certainty to the system. However, the reception of the ius commune in civil law jurisdictions did not occur without resistance and obstacles. The chapter addresses these obstacles (the ambiguous attitude of the kings, reluctance to adopt the Roman-canonic procedure, the principle of literal interpretation of legal dispositions, etc), and describes how the status of the ius commune in various Spanish systems varied. Whereas some Spanish kingdoms never acknowledged explicitly the validity of ius commune as subsidiary (Castile, Aragon), in the other kingdoms (Catalonia, Valencia, Majorca, Navarre) the ius commune met similar resistance (as in Castile or Aragón), but eventually it was explicitly admitted either as subsidiary law (Valencia, Majorca, Navarre) or as an integrative part of the legal system (Catalonia). The chapter maintains that the resort to ius commune as subsidiary law sought to prevent the compulsory use of Royal legislation in the context of political absolutism and explains why Castile, a territory governed by absolutist monarchs, never took this step.