Revista da EMERJ - V. 21 - N. 2 - Maio/Agosto - 2019

 R. EMERJ, Rio de Janeiro, v. 21, n. 2, p. 11-39, Maio-Agosto, 2019  32 Romance legal family (such as France, South American countries and, until the new code of civil procedure of 2000, Spain) originates from the Italian canonical procedure. Based on this model, a procedural model with three different stages has developed: the written introductory phase (made up of the statement of claim, defendant’s response, and the exchange of a number of briefs between the parties); the fact finding phase (made up of the taking of evidence by the instructing judge); and the final decision phase, where the decision on the dispute is to be issued by the instructing judge (or a judicial panel in certain cases) 89 , after the parties have been given the opportunity to exchange their final briefs. The fact finding phase often requires several hearings for the evidence to be compiled. This model is characterized by a sequence of hearings and not by a concentrated main hearing, such as in Gerany, England and (after the new Code of Civil Procedure, enacted in 2000) in Spain. 90 This structure of proceedings not only enables law firms to organise their work for a significant amount of pending cases, but also makes it possible for most judges to handle their heavy workload. In these conditions, they are more comfortable with a number of hearings (where very little advances), postponements centred on a mostly written handling of the case by the parties, and a final examination of written submissions by the judge, rather than with proceedings centred on a labour intense main hearing. In conclusion, the current structure of ordinary proceedings coin- cides with the interests of law firms and the bureaucratic spirit of many judges rather than with the public interest in the timely administration of justice. l) Backlog as a Leading Cause of Undue Delay The preceding remarks make it possible to claim that the huge workload (and backlog) of the courts plays the leading role in determining the undue delay of ordinary civil proceedings and making it difficult to implement procedural reforms aiming to change the structure of proceeding and introducing a proceeding centred on a main hearing. 89 For these cases, s. Art. 50–bis c.p.c. 90 For this comparison, s. R. Stürner , The Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure. An Introduction to Their Basic Conceptions, RabelsZ, 69 (2005), p. 201 ff., p. 223.