Abstract:
Common law and civil law property appear to be quite different, with the former emphasizing pieces of ownership called estates and the latter focusing on holistic ownership. And yet the two systems are remarkably similar in their broad outlines, for functional reasons. This paper offers a transaction cost explanation for the practical similarity and the differing styles of delineating property and ownership in the two systems. As opposed to the “complete” property system that could obtain in the world of zero transaction costs, actual property systems employ structures characterized by shortcuts in order to achieve property’s substantive goals of protecting interests in use. Overlooking this structure leads to the bundle of rights picture of property, even though property is a structured bundle of relationships. The architecture of property consists in part of four basic relationships, and a number of characteristic features of property automatically arise out this architecture, including exclusion rights, in rem status, and running to successors. Where civil law and common law differ is in their style of delineation, which reflects the path dependence of initial investment in feudal fragmentation in the common law and Roman-inspired holistic dominion in civil law. This transaction cost explanation for the functional similarities but different delineation process in the two systems promises to put the comparative law of property on a sounder descriptive footing.
Chang, Yun-chien and Smith, Henry E., An Economic Analysis of Civil versus Common Law Property (February 17, 2012). Notre Dame Law Review, Forthcoming.
Purpose
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Legal Colonialism – Americanization of Legal Education in Israel
Abstract:
The American influence on the legal education in Israel has been significantly increased during the last three decades. Many faculty members gained their post-graduate education in American law schools. This phenomenon emerged out of both economic and cultural considerations. The result is an importation of research and teaching practices as well as the importation of theories and values. This process has significant influence on the Israeli legal system. The legal scholarship turns to be more universal and less local. English turns to be the main language of the legal academic discourse. The focus of the academic legal research is gradually concentrating on American contents and American materials. These phenomena have negative influences on the interaction of academy and legal practitioners in Israel. Moreover, theories that emerged in an American environment are percolated from the academic world to policy makers and judges. These policies have been applied as a solution for local and unique Israeli problems. The unique characteristics of the Israeli situation are neglected. Three examples to the latter are brought from the field of judicial cases concerning land policy. The first is the influence of the Brown v. Board of Education precedent on Israel policy with regard to allocation of land resources to minorities in a Jewish state. The second is the influence of American theories concerning indigenous people and distributive justice on the privatization of agricultural land in Israel. The third is the influence of American theories of distributive justice and social responsibility on the attitude of the Israeli legal world to land expropriations. These three examples show that the influence of the American education may go beyond the legal sphere and have a significant influence on basic political interior problems of foreign nations. Thus, the Israeli case may be a prism of a modern way of colonialism – a legal colonialism. This kind of superpower influence on small friendly nations is not exercised by military or economic pressure, but by an export of academic education. It may be noticed in Obama's insight that "American values are America's great export to the world.
Sandberg, Haim, Legal Colonialism – Americanization of Legal Education in Israel (June 8, 2010). Global Jurist 10.2 (2012).
The American influence on the legal education in Israel has been significantly increased during the last three decades. Many faculty members gained their post-graduate education in American law schools. This phenomenon emerged out of both economic and cultural considerations. The result is an importation of research and teaching practices as well as the importation of theories and values. This process has significant influence on the Israeli legal system. The legal scholarship turns to be more universal and less local. English turns to be the main language of the legal academic discourse. The focus of the academic legal research is gradually concentrating on American contents and American materials. These phenomena have negative influences on the interaction of academy and legal practitioners in Israel. Moreover, theories that emerged in an American environment are percolated from the academic world to policy makers and judges. These policies have been applied as a solution for local and unique Israeli problems. The unique characteristics of the Israeli situation are neglected. Three examples to the latter are brought from the field of judicial cases concerning land policy. The first is the influence of the Brown v. Board of Education precedent on Israel policy with regard to allocation of land resources to minorities in a Jewish state. The second is the influence of American theories concerning indigenous people and distributive justice on the privatization of agricultural land in Israel. The third is the influence of American theories of distributive justice and social responsibility on the attitude of the Israeli legal world to land expropriations. These three examples show that the influence of the American education may go beyond the legal sphere and have a significant influence on basic political interior problems of foreign nations. Thus, the Israeli case may be a prism of a modern way of colonialism – a legal colonialism. This kind of superpower influence on small friendly nations is not exercised by military or economic pressure, but by an export of academic education. It may be noticed in Obama's insight that "American values are America's great export to the world.
Sandberg, Haim, Legal Colonialism – Americanization of Legal Education in Israel (June 8, 2010). Global Jurist 10.2 (2012).
Torts, Courts, and Legislatures Comparative Remarks on Civil Law Codifications of Tort Law
Abstract:
This contribution reflects on the relationship between courts and the legislature in tort law from a comparative European perspective. Though there is a substantial body of comparative literature on tort law as such, the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature in comparative tort law has received significantly attention. Here, the approach under civil law systems to tort law is and the interaction between the judiciary and the legislature under those systems is explored. If we look beyond the misconception among common lawyers that civil law courts act merely as ‘porte-parole de la loi’ there is much flexibility to be found. In tort cases, civil law courts may assume a role that complements the role assumed by the legislature. Where codes give leeway for case law to create, develop, and innovate in tort law, courts will fill the space. Where the legislature is active, courts may assume a more subservient role. Yet, there is no single concept of power balance in civil law tort systems. In some countries, courts may be more willing than in others to show policy initiative where the legislature fails to act. The overall conclusion must be that although there is a fundamental difference in the starting point between the common law and those legal systems that have a codified tort law system, the balance between the legislature and the courts may be similar in many respects.
Van Boom, Willem H., Torts, Courts, and Legislatures Comparative Remarks on Civil Law Codifications of Tort Law (February 6, 2012).
This contribution reflects on the relationship between courts and the legislature in tort law from a comparative European perspective. Though there is a substantial body of comparative literature on tort law as such, the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature in comparative tort law has received significantly attention. Here, the approach under civil law systems to tort law is and the interaction between the judiciary and the legislature under those systems is explored. If we look beyond the misconception among common lawyers that civil law courts act merely as ‘porte-parole de la loi’ there is much flexibility to be found. In tort cases, civil law courts may assume a role that complements the role assumed by the legislature. Where codes give leeway for case law to create, develop, and innovate in tort law, courts will fill the space. Where the legislature is active, courts may assume a more subservient role. Yet, there is no single concept of power balance in civil law tort systems. In some countries, courts may be more willing than in others to show policy initiative where the legislature fails to act. The overall conclusion must be that although there is a fundamental difference in the starting point between the common law and those legal systems that have a codified tort law system, the balance between the legislature and the courts may be similar in many respects.
Van Boom, Willem H., Torts, Courts, and Legislatures Comparative Remarks on Civil Law Codifications of Tort Law (February 6, 2012).
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Enforcing Bilateral Promises: A Comparative Law and Economics Perspective
Abstract:
Parties often exchange promises of future performance with one another. Legal systems frame and regulate contracts involving the exchange of bilateral promises of future performance differently from one another. Two conceptual and practical questions often arise in these bilateral situations. Should a breaching promisor be allowed to force the performance of his non-breaching promisee? Should a breaching party be able to collect damages in a contract if his counterpart was also in breach? This paper examines these interrelated questions from a comparative law and economics perspective. We consider contracts in which parties make reciprocal promises of performance and study the incentives created by applying a defense of non-performance in unilateral breach cases and the “plaintiff in default” preclusion rules in bilateral breach cases.
Parisi, Francesco, Cenini, Marta and Luppi, Barbara, Enforcing Bilateral Promises: A Comparative Law and Economics Perspective (January 9, 2012). Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-03.
Parties often exchange promises of future performance with one another. Legal systems frame and regulate contracts involving the exchange of bilateral promises of future performance differently from one another. Two conceptual and practical questions often arise in these bilateral situations. Should a breaching promisor be allowed to force the performance of his non-breaching promisee? Should a breaching party be able to collect damages in a contract if his counterpart was also in breach? This paper examines these interrelated questions from a comparative law and economics perspective. We consider contracts in which parties make reciprocal promises of performance and study the incentives created by applying a defense of non-performance in unilateral breach cases and the “plaintiff in default” preclusion rules in bilateral breach cases.
Parisi, Francesco, Cenini, Marta and Luppi, Barbara, Enforcing Bilateral Promises: A Comparative Law and Economics Perspective (January 9, 2012). Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-03.
Toward a Methodology for Successful Legal Transplants
Abstract:
Global efforts to promote rule of law and good governance have led to renewed interest in legal transplants. Many reforms projects have focused on the substance of legal transplants, prescribing particular laws, practices or institutions, concepts, norms and attitudes – usually those found in the advanced economies of Euro-America – for developing countries. The results of such projects have been disappointing. The lackluster results have called attention to the need to develop a workable methodology for legal reforms, focusing on the processes of reform. Such a methodology must be based on a better theoretical and empirical understanding of the conditions that determine the success or failure of legal transplants. Part I provides a general overview of the legal transplant literature, focusing on descriptions, prediction and evaluation. One of the shortcomings of current rule of law promotion programs is that they tend to prescribe a common set of 'best practices' for all countries. Relatively little work has been done on differentiating developing countries and developing categories or ideal types based on the types of challenges they face. Accordingly, Part I lays the groundwork for a methodology of legal reforms based on differential analysis by first distinguishing between three 'exceptional cases': failed states, post-conflict states, and transitional states. In particular, Part I contrasts the particular problems facing low-income countries (LICs) with those facing middle-income countries (MICs). Part II then develops a preliminary methodological framework for assessing legal reforms and legal transplants. Part III concludes.
Peerenboom, Randall, Toward a Methodology for Successful Legal Transplants (January 9, 2012).
Global efforts to promote rule of law and good governance have led to renewed interest in legal transplants. Many reforms projects have focused on the substance of legal transplants, prescribing particular laws, practices or institutions, concepts, norms and attitudes – usually those found in the advanced economies of Euro-America – for developing countries. The results of such projects have been disappointing. The lackluster results have called attention to the need to develop a workable methodology for legal reforms, focusing on the processes of reform. Such a methodology must be based on a better theoretical and empirical understanding of the conditions that determine the success or failure of legal transplants. Part I provides a general overview of the legal transplant literature, focusing on descriptions, prediction and evaluation. One of the shortcomings of current rule of law promotion programs is that they tend to prescribe a common set of 'best practices' for all countries. Relatively little work has been done on differentiating developing countries and developing categories or ideal types based on the types of challenges they face. Accordingly, Part I lays the groundwork for a methodology of legal reforms based on differential analysis by first distinguishing between three 'exceptional cases': failed states, post-conflict states, and transitional states. In particular, Part I contrasts the particular problems facing low-income countries (LICs) with those facing middle-income countries (MICs). Part II then develops a preliminary methodological framework for assessing legal reforms and legal transplants. Part III concludes.
Peerenboom, Randall, Toward a Methodology for Successful Legal Transplants (January 9, 2012).
Constitutional Transplants, Borrowing, and Migrations
Abstract:
This paper, which will be published in the Oxford Handbook on Comparative Constitutional Law (M. Rosenfeld & A. Sajo, eds., forthcoming 2012), explores the borrowing and migration of constitutional ideas and institutions across jurisdictions. Despite the fact that comparative constitutional law is a form of comparative law, comparative constitutionalism has thus far largely ignored the rich debates in comparative law on the topic of legal transplants. I argue that those debates can illuminate our understanding of how constitutional doctrines and ideas travel. After noting the missing legacy of comparative legal thought in the constitutional realm, the paper studies the anatomy of constitutional transplants (object, timing, motivations and patterns) and provides a framework for their normative justifications. The paper concludes with remarks on constitutional convergence.
Perju, Vlad, Constitutional Transplants, Borrowing, and Migrations (January 9, 2012). OXFORD HANDBOOK ON COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, M. Rosenfeld , A. Sajo, eds., Oxford University Press, 2012; Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 254.
This paper, which will be published in the Oxford Handbook on Comparative Constitutional Law (M. Rosenfeld & A. Sajo, eds., forthcoming 2012), explores the borrowing and migration of constitutional ideas and institutions across jurisdictions. Despite the fact that comparative constitutional law is a form of comparative law, comparative constitutionalism has thus far largely ignored the rich debates in comparative law on the topic of legal transplants. I argue that those debates can illuminate our understanding of how constitutional doctrines and ideas travel. After noting the missing legacy of comparative legal thought in the constitutional realm, the paper studies the anatomy of constitutional transplants (object, timing, motivations and patterns) and provides a framework for their normative justifications. The paper concludes with remarks on constitutional convergence.
Perju, Vlad, Constitutional Transplants, Borrowing, and Migrations (January 9, 2012). OXFORD HANDBOOK ON COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, M. Rosenfeld , A. Sajo, eds., Oxford University Press, 2012; Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 254.
Comparing Remedies for Breach of Contract in Italian and English Law
Abstract:
This detailed comparative research seeks to clarify three particular remedies available in English and Italian Law from a breach of contract. These are termination of contract, performance and monetary relief. This research has followed a systematic comparative methodology and by doing so a comprehensive conclusion on remedies in Italian and English Law has been reached. This research has ensured a full analysis of these remedies by looking beyond English and Italian Law by comparing legal history, legal systems, legal culture, legal tradition and legal jurisprudence. This research concludes by showing the importance of remedies beyond contract law. Furthermore, it will also show why it is important to carry out comparative research with a clear methodology because as harmonisation of Laws intensifies it is important that the true function of a countries Law is not overlooked and lost within the legal terminology of another legal system.
Ficetola, Luca, Comparing Remedies for Breach of Contract in Italian and English Law (May 3, 2011).
This detailed comparative research seeks to clarify three particular remedies available in English and Italian Law from a breach of contract. These are termination of contract, performance and monetary relief. This research has followed a systematic comparative methodology and by doing so a comprehensive conclusion on remedies in Italian and English Law has been reached. This research has ensured a full analysis of these remedies by looking beyond English and Italian Law by comparing legal history, legal systems, legal culture, legal tradition and legal jurisprudence. This research concludes by showing the importance of remedies beyond contract law. Furthermore, it will also show why it is important to carry out comparative research with a clear methodology because as harmonisation of Laws intensifies it is important that the true function of a countries Law is not overlooked and lost within the legal terminology of another legal system.
Ficetola, Luca, Comparing Remedies for Breach of Contract in Italian and English Law (May 3, 2011).
Comparative Law as Transnational Law: A Decade of the German Law Journal
Abstract:
In July, 2009, the German Law Journal marked its first decade with a conference hosted by the Bundesministerium der Justiz (Federal Ministry of Justice) in Berlin. The resulting discussion of the conference underscored two points: there was easy consensus that we are living in a transnational era, and that there was little agreement on how to define, or, indeed, imagine transnational law and the transnationalization of legal cultures. The majority of the participants at the conference, the scholars and commentators who have contributed to the German Law Journal during its first decade have inclined toward the engagement approach to transnational law. They also have performed or lived the engagement – implicitly – in ways that the German Law Journal uniquely make possible with its monthly, online, English-language publication of scholarship and commentary on developments in “German, European, and International jurisprudence.” The German Law Journal is an example of transnational law in action. The German jurists who regularly write about German law in English for the Journal are inherently involved in a transnational law encounter even if they do not consciously acknowledge the phenomenon. Additionally, the Journal’s broad mandate fosters engagement between legal systems in a way that is fundamental to transnational law and the transnationalization of legal cultures ...
Miller, Russell and Zumbansen, Peer, Comparative Law as Transnational Law: A Decade of the German Law Journal (2011). COMPARATIVE LAW AS TRANSNATIONAL LAW: A DECADE OF THE GERMAN LAW JOURNAL, R. Miller & P. Zumbansen, eds., Oxford University Press, 2011; Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2011-25.
In July, 2009, the German Law Journal marked its first decade with a conference hosted by the Bundesministerium der Justiz (Federal Ministry of Justice) in Berlin. The resulting discussion of the conference underscored two points: there was easy consensus that we are living in a transnational era, and that there was little agreement on how to define, or, indeed, imagine transnational law and the transnationalization of legal cultures. The majority of the participants at the conference, the scholars and commentators who have contributed to the German Law Journal during its first decade have inclined toward the engagement approach to transnational law. They also have performed or lived the engagement – implicitly – in ways that the German Law Journal uniquely make possible with its monthly, online, English-language publication of scholarship and commentary on developments in “German, European, and International jurisprudence.” The German Law Journal is an example of transnational law in action. The German jurists who regularly write about German law in English for the Journal are inherently involved in a transnational law encounter even if they do not consciously acknowledge the phenomenon. Additionally, the Journal’s broad mandate fosters engagement between legal systems in a way that is fundamental to transnational law and the transnationalization of legal cultures ...
Miller, Russell and Zumbansen, Peer, Comparative Law as Transnational Law: A Decade of the German Law Journal (2011). COMPARATIVE LAW AS TRANSNATIONAL LAW: A DECADE OF THE GERMAN LAW JOURNAL, R. Miller & P. Zumbansen, eds., Oxford University Press, 2011; Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2011-25.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
'Incorporating a Comparative Perspective into Undergraduate American Constitutional Law Courses'
Abstract:
This paper notes a rise in the inclusion of comparative law in American law school curricula and suggests that political science instructors can benefit from incorporating a comparative perspective into the constitutional law courses that are offered to undergraduates. Based on the author’s recent experience teaching undergraduate constitutional law, an approach for doing so is outlined along with its objectives and potential benefits. The paper hopes to add to work by previous APSA Teaching and Learning Conference participants who have identified effective and engaging methods for teaching constitutional law.
Narasimhan, Angela G., Incorporating a Comparative Perspective into Undergraduate American Constitutional Law Courses (2012). APSA 2012 Teaching & Learning Conference Paper.
This paper notes a rise in the inclusion of comparative law in American law school curricula and suggests that political science instructors can benefit from incorporating a comparative perspective into the constitutional law courses that are offered to undergraduates. Based on the author’s recent experience teaching undergraduate constitutional law, an approach for doing so is outlined along with its objectives and potential benefits. The paper hopes to add to work by previous APSA Teaching and Learning Conference participants who have identified effective and engaging methods for teaching constitutional law.
Narasimhan, Angela G., Incorporating a Comparative Perspective into Undergraduate American Constitutional Law Courses (2012). APSA 2012 Teaching & Learning Conference Paper.
'Transnational Comparisons: Theory and Practice of Comparative Law as a Critique of Global Governance'
Abstract:
A project seeking to assert and contrast the ‘practice’ of comparative law in distinction from the well-known and longstanding theoretical critique of the field is itself in need to define the meaning of practice. The following chapter, written for a volume edited by Jacco Bomhoff and Maurice Adams, takes up this challenge in two steps. In a first one, it revisits comparative law’s seemingly eternal self-doubt regarding its target of inquiry and its method. I will suggest that there is a great promise for comparative legal studies in the context of transnational legal pluralism as a methodological approach to the study of intersecting normative and institutional orders. In a second step, I would like to draw out the context in which current debates about comparative and transnational law are unfolding. This context - ‘global governance’- poses significant challenges for the role of law in what has fast become a multi-disciplinary inquiry regarding the contours and foundations of a continuously evolving global regulatory landscape. A reflection on the regulatory aims of comparative law as transnational law, which I have been pursuing together with Russell Miller in ‘Comparative Law as Transnational Law: A Decade of the German Law Journal’ (Oxford University Press, 2012), can serve as a powerful critique of global governance.
Zumbansen, Peer, Transnational Comparisons: Theory and Practice of Comparative Law as a Critique of Global Governance (February 7, 2012). Osgoode CLPE Research Paper No. 1/2012.
A project seeking to assert and contrast the ‘practice’ of comparative law in distinction from the well-known and longstanding theoretical critique of the field is itself in need to define the meaning of practice. The following chapter, written for a volume edited by Jacco Bomhoff and Maurice Adams, takes up this challenge in two steps. In a first one, it revisits comparative law’s seemingly eternal self-doubt regarding its target of inquiry and its method. I will suggest that there is a great promise for comparative legal studies in the context of transnational legal pluralism as a methodological approach to the study of intersecting normative and institutional orders. In a second step, I would like to draw out the context in which current debates about comparative and transnational law are unfolding. This context - ‘global governance’- poses significant challenges for the role of law in what has fast become a multi-disciplinary inquiry regarding the contours and foundations of a continuously evolving global regulatory landscape. A reflection on the regulatory aims of comparative law as transnational law, which I have been pursuing together with Russell Miller in ‘Comparative Law as Transnational Law: A Decade of the German Law Journal’ (Oxford University Press, 2012), can serve as a powerful critique of global governance.
Zumbansen, Peer, Transnational Comparisons: Theory and Practice of Comparative Law as a Critique of Global Governance (February 7, 2012). Osgoode CLPE Research Paper No. 1/2012.
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Teaching Comparative Law:
reflections and recommendations
Wood Room, Plassey House
University of Limerick, IRELAND
Friday, 20 April 2012 — 11:00-15:00
The Irish Society of Comparative Law and the School of Lawof the University of Limerick (UL) will host a one-day workshop on ‘Teaching Comparative Law’ in the Wood Room in Plassey House at UL on Friday, 20 April 2012 from 11:00-15:00.
There is no fee for participation and lunch is included.
The workshop will collate information on the current teaching of comparative law and related disciplines—especially European law, International law, and foreign laws of any type—in Ireland. To assist in this, a very brief, simple questionnaire has been prepared. Both attendees and non-attendees are invited to complete the questionnaire.
Please contact ISCL Vice-President Seán Patrick Donlan (sean.donlan@ul.ie) for additional information.
Workshop participants will (i) review the teaching of comparative law across Ireland and (ii) discuss its future role in legal education. Current innovative approaches across the globe—Maastricht, McGill, NYU, and SOAS—will be considered for their relevance to teaching both comparative and national law.
The reports provided for the workshop will be compiled and available to reporters, to Heads of Faculties, and to ISCL members. Minutes of the meeting may also be included. It is our hope that these materials might form the basis of a comprehensive overview of the teaching of comparative law and related disciplines in Ireland.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Mr Guillaume Bensussan, first recipient of the ISCL Best Masters Essay Prize, 2012, and Professor Brice Dickson, President of the ISCL 2009-2012.The ISCL held its 4th annual conference at the Faculty of Law, University College Cork on Friday 2 and Saturday 3 March, 2012. Over 60 delegates attended and presented at the conference, with a healthy blend of established academics and PhD students. The parallel sessions gave the opportunity to all to discuss their ideas, to be challenged, and to challenge others. Various corners of comparative law were explored, such as family law, human rights, legal history and theory, finance and tax, language and law, international law, ECHR law, contract law, e-law, medical law, criminal law, judicial process. The conference was opened by Dr Simone Glanert, School of Law in Kent University, who sparked a heated debate on the topic of the translatability of law. It was closed by Professor Gíuseppe Ferrari, of Universita’ Bocconi in Milan, with an insightful journey, rich of a lifetime of constitutional law experience, in the use of foreign law by constitutional courts. This year also included the innovation of awarding a ‘Best paper prize’ to a masters student- it went to Mr Guillaume Bensussan, of Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, for a brilliant paper and presentation on the patentability of medical diagnostic in the US and Europe. Throughout the day, the coffee breaks were the opportunity for the comparative scholars present to meet new acquaintances, and the dinner was attended by over half of the delegates. The conference was overall a great success, and most sincere thanks are extended to all who helped in organising it (Bénédicte Sage-Fuller, the ISCL executive committee, the UCC Law Faculty administrative staff, academic colleagues in UCC Law, BCL (Law and German) and (Law and French) students, PhD students Fiona Broughton and Dug Cubie, and last but not least maintenance staff who had the building looking shiny and smelling fresh!). Thank you also to all delegates for the interest that they showed for the ISCL, and to the development of comparative legal scholarship in Ireland. Finally, the ISCL has a new president and a new secretary, respectively Professor Steve Hedley, Faculty of Law in UCC, and Dr Niamh Connolly, School of Law in TCD. We wish them both very well in the continuous development of the activities of the ISCL, in concert with the VP and founder Seán Donlan, UL and treasurer Marie-Luce Paris, UCD.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
CALL FOR PAPERS: The Irish Constitution: Past, Present and Future
The Constitutional Studies Group at University College Dublin invites submissions for a conference on “The Irish Constitution: Past, Present and Future”. The conference is being organised to mark the 75th anniversary of the enactment of the current Irish Constitution and will take place in Dublin between June 28th and 30th, 2012.
The conference line-up will feature a range of distinguished speakers from Ireland and other jurisdictions. Confirmed participants so far include:
· The Chief Justice of Ireland, the Hon. Mrs. Justice Susan Denham
· The Hon. Mr. Justice Donal O'Donnell of the Supreme Court
· Prof. Philip Pettit (Princeton)
· Prof. Mark Tushnet (Harvard)
· Prof. Cheryl Saunders (Melbourne)
· Prof. Deirdre Curtin (Amsterdam)
· Prof Gerry Whyte (TCD)
· Prof. Martin Loughlin (LSE)
· Dr. Aileen Kavanagh (Oxford)
· Dr. Colm O’Cinneide (UCL)
The conference organisers welcome proposals from all disciplines on any topic relevant to Irish constitutionalism. Proposed papers are not required to focus on Irish law alone. The organisers particularly welcome submissions from a comparative, conceptual or inter-disciplinary perspective.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
REMINDER: CALL FOR PAPERS
REMINDER
CALL FOR PAPERS
IRISH SOCIETY OF
COMPARATIVE LAW
4th Annual General Meeting and Conference
Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd March 2012
Faculty of Law
University College Cork
Papers placing Irish law in comparative perspective are especially encouraged, but any topic in comparative or legal systems may be proposed: Private and Public Law, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Taxation, Legal Education, Legal History, etc. Research in the area of Law and Language and Translation will be considered with interest. Papers on European or International law will also be considered.
The primary objective of the Irish Society of Comparative Law is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems. Students fully registered for a masters in law, or law-related area (LL.M, MA) are therefore also encouraged to submit papers, and a special ISCL Young Researcher Prize will be awarded to the best paper delivered by a student in this category.
Proposal should be short (250 words) and sent to b.sage@ucc.ie.
The deadline for receipt of proposals is Tuesday 3rd January 2012. You do not have to be a member of the ISCL to propose a paper.
The Annual General Meeting and first plenary address by Dr Simone Glanert, University of Kent, will take place on Friday 2nd March. Conference sessions, the second plenary address by Professor Giuseppe Franco Ferrari, Università Commerciale “L. Bocconi” di Milano, and conference dinner will take place on Saturday 3rd March. Registration forms and additional information will be available shortly.
The Irish Society of Comparative Law was established in June 2008 and is recognised by the International Academy of Comparative Law. The ISCL is open to those interested in Irish and comparative law. Its purpose is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems and to seek affiliation with individuals and organisations with complimentary aims. Queries should be directed to the Secretary of the Society, Dr Bénédicte Sage-Fuller, Faculty of Law, University College Cork, at b.sage@ucc.ie.
www.irishsocietyofcomparativelaw.blogspot.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
IRISH SOCIETY OF
COMPARATIVE LAW
4th Annual General Meeting and Conference
Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd March 2012
Faculty of Law
University College Cork
Papers placing Irish law in comparative perspective are especially encouraged, but any topic in comparative or legal systems may be proposed: Private and Public Law, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Taxation, Legal Education, Legal History, etc. Research in the area of Law and Language and Translation will be considered with interest. Papers on European or International law will also be considered.
The primary objective of the Irish Society of Comparative Law is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems. Students fully registered for a masters in law, or law-related area (LL.M, MA) are therefore also encouraged to submit papers, and a special ISCL Young Researcher Prize will be awarded to the best paper delivered by a student in this category.
Proposal should be short (250 words) and sent to b.sage@ucc.ie.
The deadline for receipt of proposals is Tuesday 3rd January 2012. You do not have to be a member of the ISCL to propose a paper.
The Annual General Meeting and first plenary address by Dr Simone Glanert, University of Kent, will take place on Friday 2nd March. Conference sessions, the second plenary address by Professor Giuseppe Franco Ferrari, Università Commerciale “L. Bocconi” di Milano, and conference dinner will take place on Saturday 3rd March. Registration forms and additional information will be available shortly.
The Irish Society of Comparative Law was established in June 2008 and is recognised by the International Academy of Comparative Law. The ISCL is open to those interested in Irish and comparative law. Its purpose is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems and to seek affiliation with individuals and organisations with complimentary aims. Queries should be directed to the Secretary of the Society, Dr Bénédicte Sage-Fuller, Faculty of Law, University College Cork, at b.sage@ucc.ie.
www.irishsocietyofcomparativelaw.blogspot.com
Thursday, November 3, 2011
CALL FOR PAPERS
IRISH SOCIETY OF
COMPARATIVE LAW
4th Annual General Meeting and Conference
Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd March 2012
Faculty of Law
University College Cork
Papers placing Irish law in comparative perspective are especially encouraged, but any topic in comparative or legal systems may be proposed: Private and Public Law, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Taxation, Legal Education, Legal History, etc. Research in the area of Law and Language and Translation will be considered with interest. Papers on European or International law will also be considered.
The primary objective of the Irish Society of Comparative Law is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems. Students fully registered for a masters in law, or law-related area (LL.M, MA) are therefore encouraged to submit papers, and a special ISCL Young Researcher Prize will be awarded to the best paper delivered by a student in this category.
Proposal should be short (250 words) and sent to b.sage@ucc.ie.
The deadline for receipt of proposals is Tuesday 3rd January 2012. You do not have to be a member of the ISCL to propose a paper.
The Annual General Meeting and first plenary address by Dr Simone Glanert, University of Kent, will take place on Friday 2nd March. Conference sessions, the second plenary address (speaker TBC) and conference dinner will take place on Saturday 3rd March. Registration forms and additional information will be available shortly.
The Irish Society of Comparative Law was established in June 2008 and is recognised by the International Academy of Comparative Law. The ISCL is open to those interested in Irish and comparative law. Its purpose is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems and to seek affiliation with individuals and organisations with complimentary aims. Queries should be directed to the Secretary of the Society, Dr Bénédicte Sage-Fuller, Faculty of Law, University College Cork, at b.sage@ucc.ie.
IRISH SOCIETY OF
COMPARATIVE LAW
4th Annual General Meeting and Conference
Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd March 2012
Faculty of Law
University College Cork
Papers placing Irish law in comparative perspective are especially encouraged, but any topic in comparative or legal systems may be proposed: Private and Public Law, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Taxation, Legal Education, Legal History, etc. Research in the area of Law and Language and Translation will be considered with interest. Papers on European or International law will also be considered.
The primary objective of the Irish Society of Comparative Law is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems. Students fully registered for a masters in law, or law-related area (LL.M, MA) are therefore encouraged to submit papers, and a special ISCL Young Researcher Prize will be awarded to the best paper delivered by a student in this category.
Proposal should be short (250 words) and sent to b.sage@ucc.ie.
The deadline for receipt of proposals is Tuesday 3rd January 2012. You do not have to be a member of the ISCL to propose a paper.
The Annual General Meeting and first plenary address by Dr Simone Glanert, University of Kent, will take place on Friday 2nd March. Conference sessions, the second plenary address (speaker TBC) and conference dinner will take place on Saturday 3rd March. Registration forms and additional information will be available shortly.
The Irish Society of Comparative Law was established in June 2008 and is recognised by the International Academy of Comparative Law. The ISCL is open to those interested in Irish and comparative law. Its purpose is to encourage the comparative study of law and legal systems and to seek affiliation with individuals and organisations with complimentary aims. Queries should be directed to the Secretary of the Society, Dr Bénédicte Sage-Fuller, Faculty of Law, University College Cork, at b.sage@ucc.ie.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
LAW, LITERATURE, AND TRANSLATION CONFERENCE
TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN 9-10th of June 2012
There is no law without literature for law is also literature. Irish druids were not only poets: they were also invested with judicial authority. Still to this day, literature and translation of literature often deal with law, but very often the focus lies on the many ways of breaking the law. Especially in Ireland, poets and jurists are both celebrated and blamed for their talents in using words. Both are endowed with the power to charm their audience, sometimes at the cost of truth. The training of both a jurist and a poet involves a certain degree of self-characterization formed and influenced by culture. Law and literature, like all the humanities, share a common interest in the human experience and they look into what makes them specifically human. However, law aims at the clarity of an objective science whereas the power of literature and its translation rely on emotion and sensitivity of interpretation. Unlike what is expected from law, they feed on ambivalence, ambiguity, paradox and contradiction. Both Law and Literature are caught in the extensive possibilities but also the limitations of both written and spoken words. This conference aims to create an interdisciplinary dialogue between scholars of law, literature, and translation studies, and it seeks to explore the various interactions between these disciplines. It takes a broad approach to the fields of law, literature, and literary translation, welcoming papers considering key areas such as the following (and beyond):
· Law in literature
legal and criminal figures in literature
crime and punishment
writers and criminals
heroes and public offenders…
· Law of literature
censorship
freedom of expression
freedom of information
libel and defamation
ethics
publishing issues
copyright issues
· Law as literature
the rhetoric of law
the narrative of law
law as a performing art
staging law
law as performance
criminal confessions and jurists’ memoirs
legal reading and interpretation
translating law and comparative law
Law and translation Ownership
Copyright law
Questions of originality
An abstract of no more than 500 words should be emailed to Dr Peter Arnds (arndsp@tcd.ie) and Dr Sandrine Brisset (brissesm@tcd.ie) by the 1st of November 2011.
TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN 9-10th of June 2012
There is no law without literature for law is also literature. Irish druids were not only poets: they were also invested with judicial authority. Still to this day, literature and translation of literature often deal with law, but very often the focus lies on the many ways of breaking the law. Especially in Ireland, poets and jurists are both celebrated and blamed for their talents in using words. Both are endowed with the power to charm their audience, sometimes at the cost of truth. The training of both a jurist and a poet involves a certain degree of self-characterization formed and influenced by culture. Law and literature, like all the humanities, share a common interest in the human experience and they look into what makes them specifically human. However, law aims at the clarity of an objective science whereas the power of literature and its translation rely on emotion and sensitivity of interpretation. Unlike what is expected from law, they feed on ambivalence, ambiguity, paradox and contradiction. Both Law and Literature are caught in the extensive possibilities but also the limitations of both written and spoken words. This conference aims to create an interdisciplinary dialogue between scholars of law, literature, and translation studies, and it seeks to explore the various interactions between these disciplines. It takes a broad approach to the fields of law, literature, and literary translation, welcoming papers considering key areas such as the following (and beyond):
· Law in literature
legal and criminal figures in literature
crime and punishment
writers and criminals
heroes and public offenders…
· Law of literature
censorship
freedom of expression
freedom of information
libel and defamation
ethics
publishing issues
copyright issues
· Law as literature
the rhetoric of law
the narrative of law
law as a performing art
staging law
law as performance
criminal confessions and jurists’ memoirs
legal reading and interpretation
translating law and comparative law
Law and translation Ownership
Copyright law
Questions of originality
An abstract of no more than 500 words should be emailed to Dr Peter Arnds (arndsp@tcd.ie) and Dr Sandrine Brisset (brissesm@tcd.ie) by the 1st of November 2011.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
NOTICE: Joint Conference of the Irish Society for European Law and the United Kingdom Association for European Law
SAVE THE DATE
Reflections on the Role of European Law through the Financial and Economic Crisis
A Joint Conference of the Irish Society for European Law and the United Kingdom
Confirmed Line-up includes: STATE AID: Judge Aindrias Ó Caoimh, Court of Justice of the European Union; Leo Flynn, European Commission Legal Service; FINANCIAL REGULATION: Professor Takis Tridimas, Queen Mary University of London, School of Law; Nadia Calviño, Deputy Director General, DG Internal Markets and Services; Simon Crown, Clifford Chance London; LITIGATION: Judge Donal O'Donnell, Supreme Court of Ireland; Piers Gardner QC, Monckton Chambers; FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: Judge John Cooke, High Court of Ireland; Peter Oliver, Legal Advisor to the European Commission in Brussels; Fernando Castillo de la Torre, European Commission Legal Service; Sir Francis Jacobs, Centre of European Law, King's College London; and Judge Nial Fennelly, Supreme Court of Ireland;
Friday, 18 November 2011
The Law Society of Ireland ,
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
3rd Annual ISCL Conference, School of Law, UCD.
From left to right: professor Patrick Glenn, McGill University, Montreal; Professor Brice Dickson, Queens University Belfast; Dr Marie-Luce Paris, University College Dublin; Andrew Flynn, Trinity College Dublin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)