LEGAL RHETORIC AND PERSUASION IN PLEADINGS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE CONTINENTAL AND COMMON LAW SYSTEMS

Elvira Jorovlea; Pașcaneanu Tudor; Elvira Jorovlea; Pașcaneanu Tudor

doi:10.30888/2663-5712.2026-35-02-097

LEGAL RHETORIC AND PERSUASION IN PLEADINGS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE CONTINENTAL AND COMMON LAW SYSTEMS

Authors

Elvira Jorovlea ASEM https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8184-9951
Pașcaneanu Tudor ASEM https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1074-6186

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30888/2663-5712.2026-35-02-097

Keywords:

Legal Rhetoric, Legal Pleadings, Continental System, Common Law, Binding Precedent, Deductive Logic, Inductive Logic, Legal Storytelling, Ethics in Advocacy, Legal Convergence

Abstract

European legal rhetoric has deep roots in the Roman tradition and classical revival, fundamentally influencing how legal professionals communicate and persuade within modern judicial systems. The article explores the evolution of legal pleadings across tw

Downloads

Published

2026-01-30

How to Cite

Жоровля, Э., & Tudor, P. (2026). LEGAL RHETORIC AND PERSUASION IN PLEADINGS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN THE CONTINENTAL AND COMMON LAW SYSTEMS. SWorldJournal, 2(35-02), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.30888/2663-5712.2026-35-02-097