This paper mainly compares the prevailing competition laws and practices of both the United States of America and Saudi Arabia with respect to their historical development and the legal systems of these countries. These objectives emanate from the globalization of trade and commerce, which necessitates considerable knowledge on the part of the global investors of the similarities and differences between the two countries for ease of trade. Being a comparative study, the current work adopts a comparative analysis methodology whose main objective is to evaluate the characteristics of each competition practice. Furthermore, there has been a need to reconcile the various views regarding the practices in both systems, as some deemed them similar while others advanced that they were opposites. The results of the research were quite mixed. The research established that the similarities and differences between the competition laws of both countries vary depending on each country’s unique legal systems, socioeconomic practices, political organization, and legislations. Generally, some of these factors, particularly the political organization, resulted in the commercially restrictive practices culminating in price violation. A striking similarity is that both competition practices do not prohibit domination by a given business entity but instead prohibit the abuse of such dominance. Alternatively, a key difference between them is that while Saudi laws are borrowed from the Islamic Sharia laws, the American system is tailored to capitalistic principles. Notably, the Saudi laws are reflective of the much broader Islamic jurisprudence. This paper shall be essential because it deconstructs the competition practices of American Law and Islamic Jurisprudence in an easier way, hence helpful to those interested in this research area.
Similarities and Differences Between Financial Lease and Installment Payment in the Islamic Jurisprudence
