The New Lex Mercatoria in the Sudanese Legal System

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Ali Abdelrahman Khalil

This article examines the status of the new lex mercatoria within the Sudanese legal system. Its thesis is that the Sudanese legal system is capable of accommodating this rising new lex mercatoria as an autonomous legal order and that Sudanese courts have shown a considerable willingness to apply its rules. This thesis is examined and data proved through identifying the legal and jurisprudential basis for the enforcement of the new lex by Sudanese courts. Thereafter, this is further fostered by examining the Sudanese judicial application of this law.

1974 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Shapira

To reconcile the true boundaries between the individual and the community is the highest problem that thoughtful consideration of human society has to solve. Jellinek,The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens(1901).The legislative authority in Israel is all-powerful. Like the English Parliament, the Knesset “can do everything but make a woman a man, and a man a woman”. In the absence of a formal written Constitution, the Legislature enjoys legislative supremacy: the laws of the Knesset stand at the top of the normative legal order of the State, paramount in the prevailing legal system. Ranged against such a Legislature-giant, whose power knows no formal restraint, the Courts often feel like Lilliputians facing a Gulliver. There is, indeed, justification for this sense of inferiority harboured by the Judiciary. It is undoubtedly true that in the process of adjudicating disputes—between two individuals and between an individual and the authorities—judges apply, construe, and develop the existing rules of law and impart life to them.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-56
Author(s):  
Françoise Auvray

AbstractThis contribution deals with the wrongful behaviour of public authorities, in this case in particular the Belgian State, and delves into a challenge that the multi-levelled legal order poses for the national tort system. It inquires how the violation of an international treaty relates to liability in the national legal system. More specifically, the author examines if it is necessary, when dealing with state liability, to limit the concept of fault to the infringements of international treaties with direct effect, excluding the violation of those without such effect.


ICL Journal ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios E. Kouroutakis

AbstractInstitutions such as the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice in due time have developed a status of supremacy through judicial activism. The main target of the article is to identify the judicial activism exercised by these Courts and to reason its need in the legal order. In the first part the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice are placed in the overall polity that they belong to and the development of their status and their characteristics are analyzed. The major concern of the first part is to examine how those declared their supremacy and focus on major cases and their reason­ing.In the second part the extent of the judicial supremacy in each legal order is discussed and its effects in the decision making process are examined. The assumption that judicial activ­ism is acceptable only if it expresses consensus in the legal order is tested and it is argued that up to an extent, Judicial Activism does not distort the political agenda when it ex­presses the consensus of the legal system. Finally, it is argued that when such activism exceeds the boundaries of the consensus, the other actors in the legal system would even­tually react and would limit such activism.


1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 451-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Lapidoth

Since the establishment of the State and up to the present day, Israeli law has had to deal with a great number of various problems in the field of international law, e.g. whether the State of Israel is a successor to the obligations of the Mandatory government; the jurisdiction of the Israeli courts with regard to offences committed in demilitarized zones or beyond the State's boundaries (on the high seas or abroad); the immunity of foreign states and their representatives from the jurisdiction of Israeli courts and from measures of execution; the status of international organizations and of their employees; the effect and implications of official acts performed within the territory of a state which is at war with Israel; the effect of international treaties in Israel; the question whether the Eastern neighbourhoods of Jerusalem are part of Israel; various issues concerning extradition, and of course, many questions regarding the laws of war: the powers of the military governor, and in particular his power to expropriate land in the territories under Israeli control and to expel residents from the territories, the extent of his legislative powers, etc.


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Fais Yonas Bo’a

Pancasila sebagai sumber segala sumber hukum sudah mendapatkan legitimasi secara yuridis melalui TAP MPR Nomor XX/MPRS/1966 tentang Memorandum DPR-GR Mengenai Sumber Tertib Hukum Republik Indonesia dan Tata Urutan Peraturan Perundang Republik Indonesia. Setelah reformasi, keberadaan Pancasila tersebut kembali dikukuhkan dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2004 yang kemudian diganti dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Pancasila sebagai sumber segala sumber hukum memberi makna bahwa sistem hukum nasional wajib berlandaskan Pancasila. Akan tetapi, keberadaan Pancasila tersebut semakin tergerus dalam sistem hukum nasional. Hal demikian dilatarbelakangi oleh tiga alasan yaitu: pertama, adanya sikap resistensi terhadap Orde Baru yang memanfaatkan Pancasila demi kelanggengan kekuasaan yang bersifat otoriter. Kedua, menguatnya pluralisme hukum yang mengakibatkan terjadinya kontradiksi-kontradiksi atau disharmonisasi hukum. Ketiga, status Pancasila tersebut hanya dijadikan simbol dalam hukum. Untuk itu, perlu dilakukan upaya-upaya untuk menerapkan Pancasila sebagai sumber segala sumber hukum dalam sistem hukum nasional yaitu: pertama, menjadikan Pancasila sebagai suatu aliran hukum agar tidak terjadi lagi disharmonisasi hukum akibat diterapkannya pluralisme hukum. Kedua, mendudukkan Pancasila sebagai puncak peraturan perundang-undangan agar Pancasila memiliki daya mengikat terhadap segala jenis peraturan perundang-undangan sehingga tidak melanggar asas lex superiori derogat legi inferiori.Pancasila as the source of all sources of law has obtained legitimacy legally through the Decree of the People’s Consultative Assembly Number XX / MPRS / 1966 on the Memorandum of the House of Representatives-Gotong Royong Regarding the Sources of Law and the Order of the Republic of Indonesia. After the reformation, the existence of Pancasila was re-confirmed in Law Number 10 Year 2004 which was subsequently replaced by Law Number 12 Year 2011 on Legislation Regulation. Pancasila as the source of all sources of law gives meaning that the national legal system must be based on Pancasila. However, now the existence of Pancasila is increasingly eroded in the national legal system. This is motivated by three reasons: first, the existence of resistance to the New Order that utilizes Pancasila for the sake of perpetuity of authoritarian power. Second, the strengthening of legal pluralism that resulted in legal contradictions or disharmony. Third, the status of Pancasila is only used as a symbol in law. Therefore, efforts should be made to implement Pancasila as the source of all sources of law in the national legal system: first, make Pancasila as a flow of law in order to avoid legal disharmonization due to the application of legal pluralism. Secondly, Pretend Pancasila as the top of legislation so that Pancasila have binding power against all kinds of laws and regulations so that it does not violate the principle of lex superiori derogat legi inferiori.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (127) ◽  
pp. 115-122
Author(s):  
I. Zabara

The article deals with one of the theoretical aspects of international legal order issues – the question of its properties. The author summarizes the doctrinal views of international law and regards the basic properties of the phenomenon of international legal order as its ability to act as system complexity, dynamism, orderliness, the reality and legitimacy of actions of subjects. The author notes that there is a common position in the doctrine, according to which the international legal order is a system. However, he notes that the difference in views on the international legal order as a system consists in the components the researchers include in its composition; the author examines two theoretical approaches. The complexity of the international legal order is determined from the standpoint of the number of its elements and components, as well as the number of their connections. This opinion highlights the fact that the predominant role is played by the quantity of links between elements and components, and indicates the international legal order capacity for permanent changes under the influence of the relevant internal and external factors. The dynamism of the international legal order is characterized from the point of capacity for the development and modification. It is stated that the state of the dynamics is effected by several circumstances. The author concludes that this international legal order’s property as a dynamism is one of the qualities that characterizes its condition as a system. The orderliness of the international legal order is considered from a consistency point, the interaction of parts of the whole, due to its structure. The author notes that the ordering of the international legal order displays its internal relationships and emphasizes its status as a system. The reality of the international legal order is characterized from the point of objectively existing phenomenon. The author concludes that the allocation of the international legal order of reality as one of its properties is intended to emphasize the status of one of its most important components - the state of international relations. Separately, the author considers the question of the legality of actions of subjects of international law, which are discussed in the doctrine from the standpoint of the conditions necessary for its maintenance. The author points out that in the general context of the properties that characterize the international legal order, it can be considered as an aspect wich together with other characterizes the state of the international legal order.


Author(s):  
Jānis Neimanis

This chapter explores the impact of the pan-European general principles of good administration on the Latvian legal system. The chapter concludes that there is a conceptual match between the administrative law of Latvia and the pan-European general principles of good administration. This, among other things, is reflected by the fact that recommendations of the Council of Europe (CoE) were used as models for complementing the Latvian code of administrative procedure. It furthermore claims that general acceptance of the principle of good administration in the Latvian legal order in particular considerably facilitates reception of the CoE’s work in the realm of administrative law. At the same time the chapter highlights that implementation of the principles of good administration in Latvia could be improved and used in a more precise manner.


Author(s):  
Paul Kalinichenko

This chapter presents the findings of the author on the impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the Russian legal system. To start with, this chapter includes a brief description of the background to the modern Russian legal system and, in particular, the structure of the Russian judiciary. The contribution goes on to describe the Russian model for approximating its legal order with EU rules and standards, as well as adding some remarks on the application of EU law by the Russian courts. Then follows an explanation of the specifics of the database used, together with a description and analysis of citation of CJEU decisions by Russian courts in the period 2006–18. Conclusions and recommendations are presented in the final section of the chapter.


Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis

This chapter briefly discusses the nature of the international legal system. The premise is that the structure of the international legal system is fundamentally different from that of national legal order: contrary to the vertical structure encountered in domestic settings, in international law the structure is horizontal. States enjoy sovereign equality, while both international law-making and international adjudication are based on the consent of the States. There are various theories that have attempted to describe the nature of the international law, including naturalism, positivism, formalism, and realism. Also significant is the existence of a certain hierarchy in the international legal system, in the sense that there are some peremptory norms of international law, such as the prohibition of torture and genocide, to which there is no derogation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document