REVIEW ON: NEVSKAYA, T.A., ZVEREVA, K.A. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS ON THE NORTH CAUCASUS IN THE 18TH – THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE 20TH CENTURY: FROM THE TRADITIONAL SELF-RULE TILL THE SOVIET LEGAL SYSTEM. STAVROPOL: NORTH CAUCASIAN FEDERAL UNIVERSITY, 2019. 184 P.

Author(s):  
Е.В. Калинина

Дан анализ содержания монографии, в которой рассматривается эволюция демократических институтов у славянского населения Северного Кавказа. В рецензии приведена характеристика положений и выводов авторов монографии относительно развития традиционного самоуправления, организации выборов в различные органы власти и административные структуры. Положительной оценки заслуживает то, что подняты вопросы обычного права крестьян и казаков, а также показана специфика дворянского самоуправления на Северном Кавказе. На конкретных примерах рассмотрен процесс внедрения советской правовой системы, вытеснившей традиционные правовые институты. Приведены также замечания относительно содержания монографии. The content of the monograph is analyzed, which examines the evolution of democratic institutions among the Slavic population of the North Caucasus. The review provides a description of the presumptions and conclusions of the authors of the monograph regarding the development of traditional self-government, the organization of elections to various authorities and administrative structures. The fact, that the questions of the common law of peasants and Cossacks are raised in the research, deserves positive appraisal, the specifics of the noble self-government in the North Caucasus are also shown. The process of introducing the Soviet legal system, which supplanted traditional legal institutions, was examined via relevant examples. The contents of the monograph are commented in the review.

Author(s):  
William E. Nelson

This chapter shows how common law pleading, the use of common law vocabulary, and substantive common law rules lay at the foundation of every colony’s law by the middle of the eighteenth century. There is some explanation of how this common law system functioned in practice. The chapter then discusses why colonials looked upon the common law as a repository of liberty. It also discusses in detail the development of the legal profession individually in each of the thirteen colonies. Finally, the chapter ends with a discussion of the role of legislation. It shows that, although legislation had played an important role in the development of law and legal institutions in the seventeenth century, eighteenth-century Americans were suspicious of legislation, with the result that the output of pre-Revolutionary legislatures was minimal.


2011 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helge Dedek

Every legal system that ties judicial decision making to a body of preconceived norms has to face the tension between the normative formulation of the ideal and its approximation in social reality. In the parlance of the common law, it is, more concretely, the remedy that bridges the gap between the ideal and the real, or, rather, between norms and facts. In the common law world—particularly in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth—a lively discourse has developed around the question of how rights relate to remedies. To the civilian legal scholar—used to thinking within a framework that strictly categorizes terms like substance and procedure, subjective right, action, and execution—the concept of remedy remains a mystery. The lack of “remedy” in the vocabulary of the civil law is more than just a matter of attaching different labels to functional equivalents, it is the expression of a different way of thinking about law. Only if a legal system is capable of satisfactorily transposing the abstract discourse of the law into social reality does the legal machinery fulfill its purpose: due to the pivotal importance of this translational process, the way it is cast in legal concepts thus allows for an insight into the deep structure of a legal culture, and, convergence notwithstanding, the remaining epistemological differences between the legal traditions of the West. A mixed jurisdiction must reflect upon these differences in order to understand its own condition and to define its future course.


1976 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela Shalev

Chapter 4 of the new Israeli Contracts (General Part) Law, 1973, introduces the concept of a contract in favour of a third party, while granting express recognition to the right of a third party beneficiary. Even those, (including the author) who maintain, that the right of a third party beneficiary could and should be derived, even before the commencement of the new Law, from the general principles and premises of the old Israeli law of contract, cannot fail to see in the above-mentioned chapter an important innovation in the Israeli legal system.This paper is a comparative analysis of the institution of third party beneficiary. The analysis will consist of a presentation and critical examination of the central concepts and doctrines involved in the institution under discussion, and it will be combined with a comparative survey of the arrangements adopted in various legal systems. The choice of this approach stems from the particular circumstances of the new legislation.While in most countries, comparative legal research is a luxury, in Israel it is a necessity. The new legislation in private law is inspired to a great extent by Continental codifications. As far as the law of contract is concerned, Israel is now in the process of becoming a “mixed jurisdiction”: departing from the common law tradition and technique, and heading towards an independent body of law, derived from various sources, mainly Continental in both substance and form.


Author(s):  
Arabella di Iorio

The legal system of the British Virgin Islands is a common law system based on the English model, comprising statute law and binding case precedents. The principles of English common law and equity apply in the BVI (subject to modification by BVI statutes) pursuant to the Common Law (Declaration of Application) Act (Cap 13) and the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Virgin Islands) Act (Cap 80) respectively. The general principles of trust law are based on English law.


1969 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 127-144
Author(s):  
Sebastian Poulter

Whereas the reception and operation of English law in West and East Africa have been the subject of much study over the last few years, the introduction and application of Roman-Dutch law in Southern Africa (apart from South Africa itself) have received scant treatment.1 This article deals only with the position in Lesotho and attempts to show the extent to which Lesotho's legal system is tied to that of the Republic of South Africa, and thus strengthens the geographical and economic bonds which link the two countries.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Omar Hisham Al-Hyari

Abstract In 2017, the FIDIC launched a new edition of its Red Book—a recommended construction-related contract for building and engineering works designed by the employer. The roots of this book were influenced by the common law legal system, whereas many countries follow the civil law legal system. Amongst the latter countries is the United Arab Emirates, which has attracted construction parties from all over the world. Those who wish to use the Red Book amongst such parties should be acquainted with the local limitations on its applicability. Such acquaintance can provide them with a proper understanding of their rights and obligations. This article discusses these limitations using the doctrinal research method, which included, inter alia, an examination of all relevant decisions by local higher courts during the 2009-2019 period. The discussion shows that such limitations can be confronted owing to conflicts with local judicial jurisprudence and/or mandatory statutory provisions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 379-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel D. Smith

The French jurist Pierre Lepaulle argued that the common law trust could be best understood, in civilian terms, as a patrimony by appropriation. This argument has been influential in some civilian receptions of the trust. In fact, Lepaulle misunderstood the nature of the common law trust, which is founded on the obligations owed by the trustee in relation to the trust property. The rights of beneficiaries in the common law trust are neither purely personal rights against the trustee, nor are they real rights in the trust property, but rather they are rights over the rights which the trustee holds as trust property; they have a proprietary character since they persist against many third party transferees of the trust property. This analysis of the common law trust leads to the conclusion that it would be a fundamental change to turn the common law trust into a legal person. More generally, it is argued that any legal system that characterizes the trust as a legal person will find that it has ceased to understand the trust as a fundamental legal institution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document