Abstract
Three main tasks can be identified for comparative law. The first is to investigate differences between legal systems and, in particular, to distinguish between “real” differences, where the outcomes of the application of principles diverge between legal systems, and “superficial” differences, where similar outcomes are masked by the conceptual structures of the relevant systems. The second is to trace developments in the relationships between legal systems and thus to explore tendencies of convergence or divergence (in terms of “real” differences), noting that in some areas convergence may be required under international legal instruments. The third task is to explain and to evaluate such developments: why do systems converge or diverge? Is convergence desirable or undesirable?
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference97 articles.
1. See, especially, the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and their Recognition, 1985.
2. Dworkin R. , Taking Rights Seriously (1977), chap.4.
3. Trebilcock M. and Howse R. , “Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Diversity: Reconciling Competitive Policies” (1998) 6 European J. Law and Economics 5.
4. Judged by the Kaldor-Hicks measure of economic efficiency: cf. Ogus, op. cit. supra n.13, at pp.24–25.
5. Van Gerven W. , “Bridging the Unbridgeable: Community and National Tort Laws after Francovich and Brasserie” (1996) 45 I.C.L.Q. 507
Cited by
102 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献