No description available.

This doctoral thesis examines the different forms of procedural communication available to the Swedish courts. The choice traditionally stood between oral and written procedure. Today the procedure in the general courts is dominated by the principle of orality, while in the administrative courts, procedure chiefly takes the written form. This being said, the types of communication procedures used in courts today are constantly changing, the reason being, in part, the advent and advancement of new communication tools such as telephone, video and the internet. The cardinal aspiration for this doctoral thesis has been to prepare a generous substructure that will allow an assessment of how the principles that constitute the foundation for the choice of a form of procedural communication stand up against the arrival of new conditions. In attaining this goal the thesis takes stock of, structure, and evaluate the current knowledge of the regulation of the forms of procedural communication and the arguments that have been put forward regarding its design and application. The chosen method is a rhetorical-topical audit of the arguments provided by the legislative community. In addition it examines the relationship between these arguments and the activities of the courts and includes a comparative analysis of the current and historic conditions of the procedural communication forms. In the thesis nine different principle topoi (argument sources) for the analysed argumentation are identified and discussed: The Purpose of the Proceedings, Security, Speed, Cost-effectiveness, the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Decision-making, the Parties, Publicity and the Rules and Regulations.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.