The elevated side of this dimension, called individualism, can be defined as a preference for a vaguely connected social framework in which individuals are expected to take care only of themselves and their immediate family. Its opposite, collectivism, represents a preference for a narrow framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular group to take care of them in exchange for unconditional loyalty hi.hofstede-insights.com/national-culture. Retrieved 25 May 2020. “The avoidance dimension of uncertainty expresses the extent to which members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. (…) Countries with strong IAU maintain rigid codes of belief and conduct and are intolerant of unorthodox attitudes and ideas. The weak societies of the IAU maintain a more relaxed attitude, in practice more than principles matter. hi.hofstede-insights.com/national-culture. Retrieved 25 May 2020. The use of the vernacular and the oral nature of judicial proceedings must not only be considered in the light of the participation of lay people in the courts, but must also be linked to legislative tradition. Since the Middle Ages, Nordic legislation has been aimed at the general public and not at a class of learned jurists (which did not exist anyway). Since the law was aimed at the general public and not at trained lawyers, the legal language was simple and close to the common language of society.

This is, of course, relative: legislative language, like the language used in courts and judicial decisions, has been criticised both in the Nordic countries and generally as being too complicated and dependent on alienating terminology. However, compared to the legal language of comparable Western European countries, Nordic legal language was relatively accessible and the legislation readable and understandable, but not at the level of detail that only legal interpretation can explore. While orality is generally a predominant legal characteristic (footnote 69), legal language is close to everyday language. This must be seen in the context of the perspective of dialogue, which has already been stressed on several occasions: if the legislator and the courts are in dialogue with lay judges, the language of the law must promote dialogue and must not disturb it. As a result, the language of the law is also drawn in the direction of everyday language. van Hoecke M, Warrington M (1998) Legal culture, legal paradigms and legal doctrine: towards a new model of comparative law. Int Comp Law Q 3:495-536 Without going into detail, in the High Middle Ages it became the prerogative of the king and church in the Norse kingdoms to enact laws, with legislation valid from the promulgation in assembly. It is a common feature of all the Nordic empires that they used this technique of government very soon after its development in the study of Roman and canon law from the middle of the twelfth century. The Code Liber Augustalis, issued by King Frederick II of Sicily in 1231, can be considered the first comprehensive and coherent legislative effort in Europe during the High Middle Ages. Footnote 49 King Valdemar I of Denmark issued a code of law for Jutland in 1241; King Magnus VI In 1274 he published a code of law for the empire, in 1276 a code of law for cities, and in 1281 a code of law for Iceland; and King Magnus IV of Sweden did the same in his empire around 1350.Footnote 50 These were not singular events, but legislation established as an instrument of governance.

Footnote 51 Thus, in the Middle Ages and early modern period, singular laws were enacted throughout the Nordic empires to change legal systems, beginning with the Reformation. In 1683 and 1687, the Danish King Christian V published new legal texts for Denmark and Norway respectively, while Iceland retained its medieval code from 1281 to the present day. In 1734, Frederick I of Sweden issued a code for his Swedish Empire, including Finland.Footnote 52 Thus, the Nordic countries have a long tradition of governance by legislative law. Footnote 53 However, none of the Nordic countries has a code of law in the modern sense that has given way to the legal pragmatism discussed later. Footnote 54 There are many definitions of culture. Suffice it to say that culture is a product of human interaction; This means that through interaction in different social environments, common ideas and expectations emerge. In this way, a common understanding of words, sentence structure, and grammar is created, maintained, modified, and ultimately lost. It also determines the life cycle of conflict resolution and norm production, ideas of justice, legal methods, degree of professionalization and internationalization.

In this context, interaction is more likely to be understood as communication, as it encompasses all types of information transfer and does not depend on people actually being in the same place at the same time, observing and participating in the same events. Footnote 26 But was it just a term, or is there really a northern legal culture and even a northern judicial culture? If you ask a Nordic judge with international experience, he or she will confirm that Nordic judges often have the same positions and take the same positions in international sessions, and that they often socialize in the evening when the session is over. A Nordic prosecutor would confirm that this applies equally to Nordic lawyers, and that the same would apply to politicians; In fact, people in all the Nordic countries feel connected and seek each other`s company when they are outside their region in Europe. This very simple observation shows that there is an idea of Nordicity among Nordic lawyers and judges as there is in general in the Nordic countries. Footnote 6 We are not just talking about a northern judicial culture, but a concept of legal culture and northern culture in general. Footnote 7 At first glance, the story of the emergence of a Nordic legal and judicial culture appears to be a story of what should not have been. Culture is about commonalities that result from shared experiences. However, the similarities between the political history of the Nordic countries are limited, there were no common institutions before the end of the nineteenth century, great linguistic similarities, but no common legal language and, above all, no common legal procedure. Nevertheless, natural conditions in Europe`s far north shaped the political and legal systems in similar ways, sparking the desire to create a Nordic legal culture in the second half of the nineteenth century, with the Nordic Meeting of Lawyers playing a decisive role.

As a result, law in the Nordic countries today has several characteristics: a strong legislative tradition and strong courts with secular participation, accessible legal language in legislation and court decisions and orality in court proceedings, a small number of lawyers and limited and pragmatic case law. These characteristics can be seen as constitutive elements of an overall feature of the Nordic legal and judicial culture: dialogue. Cotterrell R (2019) Comparative Law and Legal Culture. In: Reimann M, Zimmermann R (eds.) The Oxford handbook of comparative law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 710-733 The late professionalisation of Nordic law and courts is linked to the late growth of case law in this northern region of Europe.