General Features of the System of Principles of Agrarian Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yermolenko Volodymyr ◽  

The features of the system of modern principles of agrarian law were considered in the article. Attention was drawn to the lack of unity and significant differences between individual author positions in formulating a system of such principles in both qualitative and quantitative aspects. The reason for this situation, which is the opposition of objective and subjective principles in the nature of the principles of agrarian law, has been revealed. The predominance of the subjective component leads to the diversity of the principles proposed by scientists, which should not be invented, but discovered. The inconsistency of the subjective vision of scientists with the objective nature of the principles causes the ineffectiveness of the norms that are a consequence of the implementation of such principles in the normative array. Insufficient level of disclosure of theoretical nuances of formation of principles of agrarian law leads to their identification with tasks of agrarian law as branch of law. It has been stated that most scholars introduce a two-level differentiation of the principles of agrarian law into general and branch (special) ones. Attention was sharpened in the absence of the principles of the intersectoral level in most of the systems proposed today, which leads to unnecessary duplication at the level of sectoral (special) principles. The identification of common law and constitutional principles used in the theory of agrarian law has been criticized. The introduction of a six-tier structure of the system of principles of agrarian law in terms of general (international and national), intersectoral, sectoral, sub-sectoral, institutional and sub-institutional principles was justified. Keywords: agrarian law, principle, the principle of agrarian law, system of principles of agrarian law, structure of principles of agrarian law

2003 ◽  
Vol 20 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 140-172
Author(s):  
Pernille Ironside

This article examines the debate concerning the recent reinstatement of Shari`ah law with respect to criminal matters in Northern Nigeria. The discussion explores the inherent challenges in reconciling the equally entrenched and passionate views of pro-Shari`ah supporters on their right to freedom of religion with those that question its application in terms of human rights norms and obligations, and its constitutional legality. The analysis concludes that Shari`ah laws can coexist with Nigeria’s common law system and remain relevant in the context of Islam, provided that its principles are adapted and modernized to comport with international standards for due process and are interpreted and applied consistently.


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.


1993 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 308
Author(s):  
Shaik Mohd Noor Alam S.M. Hussain

Malaysia dan Indonesia memiliki persamaan dan perbedaan dalam sistem hukum. Keduanegara mengenal Hukum Islam dan Hukum Adat. Namun berkenaan dengan hukum Baratmaka Malaysia menganut "Common Law System ", sedangkan Indonesia negeri yangdimasukkan dalam "Civil Law System ". Karangan berikut ini mencoba memperbandingkansahnya suatu perjanjian menurut hukum "Common Law" Malaysia dan "Civil Law" Indonesia. Terlihat adanya perbedaan dalam unsur-unsur yang harus dipenuhi untuk sahnya suatu perjanjian di kedua negara tersebut.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (19) ◽  
pp. 118-127
Author(s):  
Nurli Yaacob ◽  
Nasri Naiimi

Good faith has been defined as justice, fairness, reasonableness, decency, taking no chances, and so on. The concept of good faith has long been rooted in contract law under the jurisdiction of Civil law, although the definition of it is still debated until today. However, the view of the Common Law tradition does not recognize the concept of good faith as long as the contract is entered into with the freedom of contract and both parties abide by the terms of the contract. Given that a franchise contract involves a long-term contract and always been developed, it is impossible to define both rights and responsibilities base on express terms only. As such, the franchise contract gives the franchisor the right to exercise its discretion in executing the contract. It is in this context that the element of good faith is very important to ensure that the franchisor does not take advantage of the franchisee and that the business continues to prosper. Therefore, the objective of this article is to discuss the concept of good faith in a franchise contract. The findings show that the common law system that initially rejected the application of the concept of good faith also changed its approach and began to recognize the concept of good faith as it is very important for relational contracts such as franchise contracts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document