Editing Procedural law (section)

==European history and concepts==

===Procedural law and substantive law in various languages===
"Procedural law" in contrast to "[[substantive law]]" is a concept available in various legal systems and languages. Similar to the English expressions are the Spanish words ''derecho adjetivo'' and ''derecho material'' or ''derecho sustantivo'', as well as the Portuguese terms for them, ''direito adjetivo'' and ''direito substantivo''. Other ideas are behind the German expressions ''formelles Recht'' (or ''Verfahrensrecht'') and ''materielles Recht'' as well as the French ''droit formel/droit matériel'', the Italian ''diritto formale/diritto materiale'' and the Swedish ''formell rätt/materiell rätt''; all of which, taken literally, mean "formal" and "material" law.

The same opposition can be found in the Russian legal vocabulary, with ''материальное право'' for substantive law and ''процессуальное право'' for procedural. Similar to Russian, in [[Bulgarian language|Bulgarian]] "материално право" means substantive law and ''процесуално право'' is used for procedural. In Chinese, "procedural law" and "substantive law" are represented by these characters: "程序法" and "实体法". In Germany, the expressions ''formelles Recht'' and ''materielles Recht'' were developed in the 19th century, because only during that time was the Roman ''actio'' split into procedural and substantive components.

===Substance of procedural law/substantive law in Europe===
In the European legal systems the [[Roman law]] had been of great influence. In ancient times the Roman civil procedure applied to many countries. One of the main issues of the procedure has been the ''actio'' (similar to the English word "act"). In the procedure of the ''legis actiones''  the ''actio'' included both procedural and substantive elements.<ref>{{Cite web |title=LacusCurtius • Roman Law — Actio (Smith's Dictionary, 1875) |url=https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Actio.html |access-date=2023-12-12 |website=penelope.uchicago.edu}}</ref> Because during this procedure the ''[[praetor]]'' had granted, or denied, litigation by granting or denying, respectively, an ''actio''. By granting the ''actio'' the ''praetor'' in the end has created claims. I.e. a procedural act caused substantive claims to exist. Such priority (procedure over substance) is contrary to what we think of the relationship nowadays. But it has not only been an issue of priority and whether the one serves the other. Since the ''actio'' had been composed of elements of procedure and substance it was difficult to separate both parts again.

Even the scientific handling of law, which developed during medieval times in the new universities in Italy (in particular in Bologna, Mantua), did not come to a full and clear separation. The English system of "writs" in the Middle Ages had a similar problem to the Roman tradition with the ''actio''. In Germany, the unity of procedure and substance in the ''actio'' definitely was brought to an end with the codification of the ''[[Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch]]'' (BGB) which came into force on January 1, 1900. The expression ''Anspruch'' (§ 194 of BGB) - meaning "claim" - has been "cleared" from procedural elements. And this was the time for "founding" the terms ''formelles / materielles Recht''. However, after [[World War II]] the expression ''formelles Recht'' was found to be "contaminated" and to a broad extent has been replaced by ''Prozessrecht'', narrowing the idea behind it to "law of litigation" (thereby excluding e.g. the law of other procedures and the law on competences).