Abstract EN:

After the image of the body of laws producted during the lastest thirty years, the neiertz's enactment brings forward an important contentious complicated to manage. Therefore justice is once again confronting itself with the dilemma (quantitative/qualitative) but indeed immersing itself into a specific context. Tribunals distinguish themselves on account of their status, competences, vocations. . . Now wether they are + magistrats courts or magistrats great courts ;, they are submitted to the same constraints and they behave themselves in the same way in the framework of the + over getting into debts ; enactment application. They are indeed coping with a multifarious reality : unspecified, numerical, temporal, functional and structural. Although we notice innovations and changes, those are not making up the signs of a real adaptation of the courts of law to the constraints of the neiertz's enactment. Two patterns of hindrances are in the centre of the inadaptation of the courts of law toward the constraints they meet in the framework of the 31. 12. 89 law. The first one constitutes the aspect of their bureaucratic work, but also, more in the lump, the judicial institution, associated or not with the strategies of the +judicial actors ;. But tribunals are institutions as well. A second pattern of hindrances is making a strand againts their adaptation to the constraints they meet in the framework of the neiertz's enactment: the representations of the judicial actors. Courts of law are directed by representations which guide their work but also their pratical experience. In fine they do not fit to the neiertz fact, for they show themselves hermetically closed to any manner of change.