Ad Hoc Procedure

79 Pages Posted: 28 Apr 2017 Last revised: 23 Oct 2017

Pamela Bookman

Temple University Beasley School of Law

David L. Noll

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - Rutgers Law School

Date Written: April 28, 2017

Abstract

“Ad hoc procedure” seems like an oxymoron. A traditional model of the civil justice system depicts courts deciding cases using impartial procedures that are defined in advance of specific disputes. This model reflects a process-based account of the rule of law in which the process through which laws are made helps to ensure that lawmakers act in the public interest. Judgments produced using procedures promulgated in advance of specific disputes are legitimate because they are the product of fair rules of play designed in a manner that is the opposite of ad hoc.

Actual litigation frequently reveals the inadequacy of procedures created according to this traditional model. To fix the procedural problems that arise in such cases, litigants, judges, lawyers, and legislatures can design procedure on the fly, changing the “rules of the road” as the case proceeds. Ad hoc procedure-making allows the civil justice system to function when ordinary procedure fails, but it challenges the rule-of-law values reflected in the traditional model of procedural design. Instead of being created by lawmakers who operate behind a veil of ignorance, ad hoc procedure is made by actors seeking specific outcomes in pending cases. The circumstances in which ad hoc procedure is created raise concerns about lawmakers’ motivations, the transaction costs of one-off procedural interventions, the wisdom and fairness of those interventions, and the separation of powers.

This Article introduces the phenomenon of ad hoc procedure and considers its place in a world where much procedure continues to be made through the traditional model. Focusing on ad hoc procedural statutes, the Article contends that such statutes’ legitimacy—or lack thereof—depends on different factors than ordinary civil procedure. Unable to claim legitimacy from the circumstances in which it is crafted, ad hoc procedural legislation must instead derive legitimacy from the necessity to address a procedural problem and the effort to produce substantively just outcomes.

Keywords: ad hoc procedure, Kapitalmusterverfahrensgesetz, KapMug, asbestos, Wet collectieve afwikkeling massaschade, WCAM

JEL Classification: K10, K40, K41

Suggested Citation

Bookman, Pamela and Noll, David L., Ad Hoc Procedure (April 28, 2017). 92 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 767 (2017); Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-13. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2960157

Pamela Bookman (Contact Author)

Temple University Beasley School of Law ( email )

1719 N. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19122
United States

David Noll

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - Rutgers Law School ( email )

NJ
United States

Register to support our free research

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
122
rank
206,283
Abstract Views
565
PlumX