Court Day – Definition, Legal Framework, and Historical Development
Der Court Day is a traditional term from German legal practice that refers to a fixed day on which a court convenes to administer justice. Court days played a central role, especially in the legal history of Central Europe, for the enforcement, administration, and application of the law. In the modern context, the term describes specific hearing or session days during which courts hold deliberations, hearings, and issue judgments. This article provides a comprehensive explanation of the legal foundations, functions, and historical developments of a court day and highlights its significance in today’s legal system.
Origin and Historical Development of the Court Day
Court Days in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period
Court days already formed a fundamental pillar of the administration of justice in the Holy Roman Empire and other Central European legal systems as early as the early Middle Ages. They were of particular importance to the regional courts, town courts, and feudal courts. On a fixed date, which often took place cyclically (e.g., four times a year), legal disputes were negotiated before a court assembly—consisting of noble or municipal officials and sometimes sworn laymen. One well-known example is the so-called Thing as a Scandinavian-Germanic court day, or the regional councils (Landtage), at which jurisdiction was exercised.
The convocation was carried out by a court messenger or a formal summons. Absence despite proper summons could be sanctioned by fines or even loss of assets (e.g., loss of a fief).
Change in Judicial Procedure
With the ongoing professionalization and centralization of the administration of justice, especially from the early modern period onwards, court days became increasingly institutionally organized. New courts with fixed opening hours and a permanent panel of judges replaced the originally temporary and locally bound court days. The function of the court day as an assembly-based legal forum changed fundamentally during the development towards permanent courts.
The Term Court Day in German Law
Court Day in Civil and Criminal Justice
In current German legal understanding, the term Court Day has no conclusively codified definition. However, it is used in several normative contexts. As a basic principle, a court day is considered an appointment set for court hearings, sessions, or decrees. It includes:
- Scheduled days for main hearings in criminal proceedings,
- Appointments for oral hearings in civil proceedings,
- Scheduled days for the pronouncement of judgments or orders,
- Session days for certain judicial matters (e.g., hearings under §§ 278 ff. ZPO).
The scheduling of a court day is generally carried out by the court itself and announced to the participants by summons. If parties or witnesses fail to attend a court day, German procedural law provides for certain legal consequences depending on the field of law (for example, default judgments, fines).
Statutory Provisions and Application
Current German law contains explicit provisions on court days, for example in § 220 of the Courts Constitution Act (GVG) regarding the holding of court days away from the regular seat. It stipulates that, to facilitate the proper administration of justice, courts may hold court days outside their permanent seat as needed.
The Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), and administrative procedural law also use the term in connection with the notification of dates, the summons of parties and witnesses, and the announcement of judgments or orders.
The Organization and Conduct of a Court Day
Scheduling and Summoning
Setting the date of a court day is one of the original tasks of the court. The presiding or assigned judge determines the date and time and instructs the court registry to send summonses to all parties involved. The summons provides information about the time, place, and reason for the court day, and may include additional notes depending on procedural law (e.g., witness summons, information about participation obligations).
Procedure of a Court Day
A typical structure is as follows:
- Opening by the presiding judge
- Establishment of presence (parties, witnesses, experts, interpreters)
- Reading of the subject matter of the dispute or the indictment
- Hearing of the case (taking of evidence, hearings)
- Closing arguments
- Deliberation and pronouncement of judgment (depending on the type of proceedings, possibly in a separate court day)
The recording of the essential proceedings is required to ensure the accountability of judicial actions and the possibility of review by appellate courts.
Publicity and Confidentiality
Court days are fundamentally subject to the principle of public hearings (§ 169 GVG: public hearings). There are statutory exceptions, for example to protect personal rights, public order, or the legitimate interests of children and young people.
Court Days in the International Context
Numerous legal systems use analogous court day regulations, particularly in Switzerland, Austria, and European courts. The scheduling, summoning, and conduct of court days largely follow the procedures established in Germany, although country-specific differences exist, especially concerning judicial competence and the form of summons.
Significance of the Court Day in Legal Practice
The court day serves as a central anchor point within the judicial procedure. It structures the course of court proceedings, ensures the formal hearing of all parties by way of official summons, and provides transparency regarding the proceedings and the decision-making process in legal disputes. Court days also guarantee the accessibility of court decisions to the public and serve the purpose of control and traceability of state jurisdiction.
Literature and Further Reading
- Courts Constitution Act (GVG)
- Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO)
- Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO)
- Manfred Pieck: “Court Days in German Medieval Times and Their Function”, in: Legal History in the European Context, 2014
- Wolfgang Sellert: “German Legal History”, 9th edition, 2020
Summary: The term court day describes, both historically and in modern times, a fixed date for the meeting of a judicial body. From its great historical significance, the court day has developed into an integral component of today’s procedural system and is essential for upholding the rule of law.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is a court day determined and who is responsible for it?
The court day is generally set by the competent court. Scheduling is carried out by the judge’s office or the court registry. Various factors are considered, especially the type of proceedings, jurisdiction of the chamber or single judge, availability of the parties involved (e.g., plaintiff, defendant, possible witnesses), legal deadlines, as well as organizational aspects such as room availability and case processing status. In criminal matters, the public prosecutor’s office may suggest dates; in civil matters, under § 272 para. 1 ZPO, the court may determine the date as early as possible. The summons of the parties is effected by delivery of a written notification or summons including all relevant details (date, time, place, courtroom, subject of proceedings). A court deadline to comment on preferred dates may be granted in individual cases, but is not mandatory.
Can a court day be postponed or cancelled?
Postponement or cancellation of a scheduled court day is possible under certain circumstances, but requires an important reason (e.g., illness of a participant, unavoidable scheduling conflict, unforeseeable events). The application must be made in writing or, in urgent cases, informally, such as by telephone with subsequent written confirmation. The necessity and admissibility of the postponement are decided by the competent court, weighing the interests of both parties and procedural economy. In criminal proceedings, the consent of the public prosecutor’s office is generally required. For short-term postponements, sanctions (e.g., cost reimbursement obligations) may arise for the responsible party according to § 227 para. 1 ZPO or § 213 StPO. Furthermore, all parties must be properly informed of the postponement or cancellation.
What happens if a party does not appear at a scheduled court day?
If a party fails to appear at a court day, various consequences may arise depending on the type of proceedings. In civil proceedings, a default judgment can be issued in accordance with §§ 330 et seq. ZPO at the request of the attending party. In criminal proceedings, a penal order may be issued, or a decision may be made in written proceedings. In proceedings on administrative offences, a decision pursuant to § 74 para. 2 OWiG may be rendered. In certain cases, such as when personal attendance is mandatory (§ 141 ZPO), the court may impose a fine or order the party to be brought before the court. Reasons for absence (e.g., illness, force majeure) must be credibly demonstrated, otherwise procedural and possibly substantive disadvantages may result.
Who must be summoned for a court day and what formal requirements apply?
All participants in the proceedings (party to a civil case, defendant and any co-accused in criminal proceedings), necessary witnesses, and, if needed, experts are generally summoned to attend a court day. The summons is usually served formally in writing in accordance with § 174 ZPO or §§ 35-37 StPO. The notice period for the summons is at least one week in civil cases (§ 217 ZPO), at least one week in criminal cases (§ 217 StPO), but may be shortened in urgent cases. The summons must contain details of the date, place, the role of the recipient, and the subject of the hearing. For witnesses and experts, further information about the legal consequences of non-appearance and about reimbursement and compensation should also be included.
What obligations and rights do parties to proceedings have in connection with the court day?
Parties to proceedings are obliged to comply with the scheduled date if their attendance is required. They have the right to be informed in due time about the hearing date and subject, to request postponement, and to take procedural actions—such as submitting evidence applications or being represented by lawyers. Unjustified absence may lead to procedural disadvantages (e.g., default judgment, fine, or order of detention). According to statutory provisions (especially § 129 ZPO, § 233 ZPO), participants may also use electronic communication to exercise their rights, provided the court allows it. Interpreters or other assistance can be requested if needed.
What should be observed when recording the minutes of a court day?
A record of every court day is to be made by the recording clerk or the court in accordance with § 160 ZPO or § 271 StPO. This record must reflect the essential course and content of the hearing, particularly the presence of participants, motions filed, evidence taken, statements made, and judicial orders given. The minutes are of considerable importance for further proceedings and any appeals. Errors or omissions in the minutes may be corrected under certain formal prerequisites according to §§ 164 ZPO, 274 StPO. On request, the parties are entitled to view the minutes. In certain types of proceedings (e.g., commercial register or family matters), special requirements for recording may apply.
What are the consequences of a public hearing at a court day and how is exclusion of the public handled?
As a rule, court days—especially main hearings—are open to the public due to the principle of publicity (§ 169 GVG). Exceptions are expressly regulated by law and may only be permitted under certain conditions (e.g., to protect personal rights, youth protection, confidentiality) (§ 171b GVG, § 172 GVG). The exclusion of the public is ordered by a formal court decision after an oral hearing on its necessity, in which the parties are also involved. Violation of the principle of publicity or an improper exclusion may lead to procedural errors and grounds for appeal. Press representatives have special rights when attending public hearings, but are not privileged compared to other participants.
How is it ensured that proceedings are properly conducted despite short-term changes to the court day?
Short-term changes to the court day, for example due to a judge’s illness or the prevention of an essential party to the proceedings, require rapid but legally sound measures. The court must ensure that all parties are immediately and lawfully informed. Established communication channels are used for this (e.g., fax, electronic communication, telephone with written confirmation). Changes of date must be recorded and the new court day must be duly notified again. Observance of deadlines and the right to be heard for all parties must be ensured. Possible delays and disadvantages resulting from rescheduling can be taken into account in decisions on costs and case management.
