Peer Review

Procedure

A manuscript submitted for publication in the «Articles» or «Notes» sections undergoes a preliminary examination by the Editor-in-Chief or a Co-Editor and by the Editorial Staff, to establish:

• whether the manuscript falls within the subject areas covered by the Journal (public law, general private law, commercial and economic law, labour law, transport and navigation law, international and EU law);
• whether it displays any manifest and serious shortcomings in scholarly quality;
• whether it complies with the Journal’s editorial rules.

If the preliminary examination is successful, the manuscript proceeds to peer review proper. Different procedures apply depending on whether it is intended for the «Articles» or the «Notes» section.

Manuscripts intended for the «Articles» section are assessed by a university professor, Italian or foreign, with expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript, who corresponds exclusively with the Editorial Board.

The Journal adopts a double-blind peer-review procedure: the Editorial Board sends the manuscript to the reviewer in anonymised form, and the reviewer’s identity is not disclosed to the author. The reviewer, together with the Editorial Board, is bound to keep the review confidential. The confidentiality of reviewers’ identity, even in the case of a positive assessment, ensures greater independence of judgement.

In exceptional cases involving manuscripts submitted by authors of established scholarly standing or international reputation, the Editorial Board may assume responsibility for the decision to publish without external peer review.

Manuscripts intended for the «Notes» section are instead assessed by the Editorial Board and by a member of the Scientific Committee.

Beginning with Volume XXV (2027), contributions published in the «Papers» section – short contributions on current legal issues, book reviews, and papers presented at conferences or book presentations – are not subject to peer review. They are assessed by the Editorial Board in accordance with Article 2 of the Code of Ethics and are identified as «Papers» in the table of contents of the volume, on the website and on the first page of the contribution.

Criteria

Reviewers assess:

• the soundness of the methodological approach;
• the adequacy of the essential bibliography, except for manuscripts deliberately without bibliographical references;
• clarity of exposition;
• the contribution’s originality in relation to the existing state of research; in the case of case notes, originality is assessed with reference to the analysis of the reasoning adopted in the decision, whether critical or constructive.

Outcome

The outcome of the peer review may be:

• acceptance of the manuscript for publication;
• acceptance subject to revisions indicated by the reviewer; in that case, the manuscript is returned to the author for revision, and the adequacy of the revisions is assessed by the Editor-in-Chief;
• rejection of the manuscript.

The final decision always rests with the Editor-in-Chief.