THE COUNTERSUITS IN THE PENAL PRACTICE OF EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY DUBROVNIK

The authors have analysed the frequency of countersuits on the ground of the penal proceedings tried by the central Criminal Court of Dubrovnik in three ten-year periods: 1711/1720, 1751/1760 and 1791/1800. A rapid rise in the cases of the kind in the second period relates to the growing trend of trials for minor issues (battery, light injury, insult, etc.), confirming the theory that the stable social environment of the period marked by positive expectation prompted the victims to seek judicial remedy by cases which were passed over in the period of crisis. Although Ragusan laws barely mention the question of guilt, the cases with countersuits show that the responsibility of the persons involved in the conflict was thorougly evaluated. In fact, the court merged the hearing of evidence in both cases, and generally brought the sentences on the same occasion. The analysis has shown that countersuits were often used by the plaintiff (defendant in the primary suit) in order to submit facts in his or her favour. Namely, the rules of procedure introduced the defendant's right of being heard only in 1742, but even then they were usually examined in a late stage of the proceeding, having no real chance to play an active role in it. By bringing a countersuit and providing related evidence, the plaintiffs expanded their possibility to influence the issue of the primary case against them. It came not as a surprise that the persons who had already violated the law and had experience at court were more inclined to bring a countersuit, because they understood fully that it might be a useful stratagem to improve their position before the law.