scholarly journals Prohibition: Between the Linguistic and the Legislative Concepts

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-147
Author(s):  
Dr. Alaa Naji Jassim Al-Mawla ◽  
Dr. Hayder Abd Alzahra Mauff

Comparative studies take the lead among all studies, including modern linguistic studies. They are the means through which researchers get aware of other sciences and find connections among them. Thus, legislative texts are the database of the present study. The legal rule aims at achieving two issues: Doing something, which corresponds to order. What the addressee must avoid, which corresponds to prohibition that has been chosen for the present study. The present study starts with defining prohibition linguistically and grammatically, its meaning among the scholars of origins, and then its concept among those involved in the drafting of texts. The present study aims at identifying methods and expressions indicating prohibition, among which is the important expression “don’t”. Finally, punishment, which is the common result for not complying, is indicated. Linguistic, legislative drafting books, and some Quranic texts are used as the database for the present study. The Penal Code and the Civil Law are taken from the legal texts. The present study comes up with results; legislators do not use the term prohibition. Instead, they use prohibitive formulas. Legislators do not abide by what grammarians abide to. Grammarians use“ don’t + the present tense. But, legislators use everything that leads to the meaning of avoiding doing something except the grammarians’ formula because it makes legal texts subject to interpretation and diligence.

Linguistica ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-110
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav V. Ivanov

The recent progress of the study of the Hittite Laws was largely due to the addition of new fragments to the texts that in many respects proved the correctness of the views expressed earlier by Prof V.Korošec. It seems that another important source of the insights in the original meaning of the oldest parts of the Laws lies in the comparison of the oldest Hittite tradition with other Indo-European legal texts. The comparative studies of the last years have shovm that one might speak about the Common Indo-european legal tradition or - to use Gernets aptterm - »proto-law« »prédroit« (that is the oldest system where the legal institutions and the religious practice were blended into one syncretic whole). It has been shown in these studies that several terms connected with the legal status of a woman in the house had Common Indo-European origin.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Spivack

AbstractCivil law regimes in Europe have been cautiously open to the common law trust for commercial purposes, and to some forms of the private trust as well. This openness indicates that the time may be right to issue a warning to civil lawyers about the recent proliferation of highly problematic forms of the trust in the U. S., and to offer an explanation of the dysfunction which allowed these trusts to win legislative approval. Civil law may be less amenable to these forms of trust for reasons of social policy and legal philosophy as expressed in foundational legal texts. Recent changes to EU trust law and to French and Dutch tax law indicate that this may be the case. This article discusses these new trust forms and discusses some elements of civil law which, at least from a common lawyer’s perspective, offer some resistance to them.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-290
Author(s):  
Colm Peter McGrath ◽  
◽  
Helmut Koziol ◽  

Legal Studies ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Dietrich

The common law has solved questions of liability arising in the context of precontractual negotiations by resort to a range of different doctrines and approaches, adopting in effect ‘piecemeal’ solutions to questions of precontractual liability. Consequently, debate has arisen as to how best to classify or categorise claims for precontractual work and as to which doctrines are best suited to solving problems arising from anticipated contracts. The purpose of this article is to consider this question of how best to classify (cases of) precontractual liability. The initial focus will be on the ongoing debate as to whether principles of contract law or principles of unjust enrichment can better solve problems of precontractual liability. I will be suggesting that unjust enrichment theory offers little by way of explanation of cases of precontractual liability and, indeed, draws on principles of contract law in determining questions of liability for precontractual services rendered, though it does so by formulating those principles under different guises. Irrespective, however, of the doctrines utilised by the common law to impose liability, it is possible to identify a number of common elements unifying all cases of precontractual liability. In identifying such common elements of liability, it is necessary to draw on principles of both contract and tort law. How, then, should cases of precontractual liability best be classified? A consideration of the issue of classification of precontractual liability from a perspective of German civil law will demonstrate that a better understanding of cases of precontractual liability will be gained by classifying such cases as lying between the existing categories of contract and tort.


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 313
Author(s):  
Roman Trzaskowski

Effects of Constitutional Tribunal’s Judgments in the Time PerspectiveSummaryThe problem of the time effects of the Constitutional Tribunal’s rulings remain within the area of interest of both constitutional and civil law scholars. It is widely discussed because of its enormous practical importance: more and more often the common courts and the Supreme Court have to deal with the laws which have been declared unconstitutional.The main question is whether the courts should apply the unconstitutional law while deciding on a case in which legally significant events had taken place before the law was declared null and void.The Polish Constitution does not give a clear answer to this question. The most important provisions seem to be contradictory, which makes it possible to use them as arguments for opposing positions.The scholars’ opinions differ significantly: some of them, followed by the Supreme Court, accept the so-called „retrospective” effect (the unconstitutional law cannot by applied), the others, together with the Constitutional Tribunal, take the opposite view. A few try to find a compromise.The proposition presented in this paper is to be classified as belonging to the third group.Indeed it seems that there is a need for a flexible approach. The time effects of a ruling shall be expressly stated by the Constitutional Tribunal. When the Tribunal fails to do so, the common courts have to asses themselves the rulings’ effects, being guided, among other things, by the principles of the civil law. There are strong arguments that the Constitution seems to favor the retroactive effect, yet it is not decisive. There are certainly situations, where a prospecitve effect shall be accepted: ultimately it is a question of balancing different constitutional and civil law values. 


Author(s):  
Roman Sabodash

The paper shows how the publication of court decisions influenced the formation of a precedent. The author reviewed scientific works devoted to research the precedent in common and continental law. The research explains that the formation of precedent in England was accompanied by development of the judgment’s reviews and their prevalence among lawyers. Of course, publication of court decisions was not a major factor in setting a precedent, but it played a significant role in this. The paper also describes facts of the publication of court decisions in Italy, Germany, France and the Netherlands, as well as the admissibility of their citations at the court of cassation. The general idea of the paper is that convincing precedent exists and is used although the countries of continental law do not have a «classic» precedent. The paper gives a review of the importance of the state register of court decisions for setting a convincing precedent in Ukraine. The author analyzes the pros and cons of citing court decisions. It’s stated that, unfortunately, the quotations of court decisions is not always correct and sometimes amounts to rewriting the «right» legal position without comparing the circumstances of the case. The article concludes that the practice of applying a convincing precedent in Ukraine is only emerging and needs further improvement.          It has been found out that the publication of judgments of supreme courts is one of the factors that helped to establish precedent in common law countries. The publication of court rulings also created the conditions for a convincing precedent in civil law countries (especially in private law). At the same time, the formation of a “convincing precedent» in countries where court decisions are published in publicly available electronic court registers is much faster than in common law countries. Of course, the structure and the significance of the precedent in the common law and civil law countries are different, but one cannot dismiss that publication of court decisions as one of the factors for establishing the precedent.


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Zuzanna Służewska

THE CONTRACT OF PARTNERSHIP AS A BASE OF IN SOLIDUM LIABILITY IN ROMAN LAWSummary In the modern civil law joint and several liability of partners in a partnership is a rule rather than an exception. According to the common opinion this concept did not originate in the Roman law but was first invented in the medieval times by glossators and commentators. The Roman partnership created only a private relation between partners (who, due to a conclusion of that contract were reciprocally obliged to act together in accordance with a good faith in order to conduct common business and to divide profits and bear losses in proportion to their respective shares) and its conclusion did not affect their liability against third parties. The partners had no right to bind themselves contractually to any third parties, unless they all acted jointly (in this case, however, their joint representation was derived from their expressed declarations and not the existence of a contract o f partnership). Thus, any commitment made by an individual partner, even if made within the scope of a partnership having obtained other partners’ consent, was treated as a personal debt of this partner and the remaining partners were not liable against his contractor. Then, of course, the partner who made a commitment (acting within the partnership’s business) could claim a part of what he had paid to a third party from other partners in proportion to their respective shares in the common enterprise.Such a solution was necessary because of the purely consensual character o f the Roman partnership and the lack of any formal procedure of its conclusion and dissolution. The existence of that contract could not affect the model of the external liability of partners, because it would be too risky for third parties, which had no possibility to make sure if a contract of partnership between some persons had been actually concluded or not. Thus, the role of a contract of partnership in the Roman law was only limited to determine a mutual liability o f partners, to specify their respective rights and obligations and to define the scope of their liability against other partners.There are only a few written sources concerning so called specific kinds of partnership characterized by untypical joint and several responsibility of partners. Moreover these texts are not very clear and are difficult to interpret, so the issue of specific kinds of a partnership is a matter of doubts among Romanists. Some authors even believe that the specific types of partnership did not exist in the Roman law at all.It should be firstly observed that the texts regarding a contract of partnership itself (the texts included in the title pro socio of Justinian’ Digest) did not raise the question of the external liability of partners because they were devoted to internal settlement o f accounts within sociu Thus, taking into account only these texts one cannot ascertain that a conclusion of a contract of partnership could not affect in any way the model of the partners’ liability against third parties.Secondly, the other texts concerning the regulation of conducting an economic activity in the Roman law (actio institoria, actio exercitoria and actio de peculio) present some regularity in an introduction of joint and several liability of debtors.On the one hand that model of the liability was introduced in situations in which protecting safety of trade required that the creditor be able to claim a whole amount o f the debt from one person only.On the other hand this model of liability could be introduced only in these cases in which some internal relation existed between several debtors. On the grounds of such relations the debtor who satisfied in full the creditor’s claim could sue other debtors in order to recover their respective parts in the debt. In the Roman law that internal relation that guaranteed the possibility of a recourse could be either a joint-ownership or a partnership.Having considered that, one may say that the texts concerning specific kinds o f partnership do not prove existence of any special type of societas. These sources regard only the situations when a joint and several liability between several debtors was introduced because it was justified by the circumstances: that is the necessity to protect the safety of trade on one hand and the existence of the contract of partnership that guaranteed a possibility to realize the recourse, on the other.In conclusion one may say that although a closing of a contract of partnership did not create a joint and several liability of partners, in some cases its existence was decisive for introducing this model of liability since it guaranteed to every party a possibility to act against the others to obtain the recourse. Thus, Roman jurisprudence made an important step towards the future introduction o f joint and several liability of partners as a rule of a civil law.


Author(s):  
Ludmila S. Dampilova ◽  
◽  
Erzhena B. Ayusheeva

Introduction. The article aims to analyze Buryat versions of the epic Geser to identify their local features. It includes a detailed review not only of published texts, but also of manuscripts stored in the archives of Buryatia. For the first time, the regional versions of Geser are systematically examined as a necessary stage for further comparative studies of the genesis and transformation of epic traditions in Central Asia. Methods. The work uses comparative-historical and comparative methods of analysis. Of these, the latter was of key importance in comparing the versions of the epic that differ in terms of the place of their origin and temporal parameters. Results and discussion. The analysis began with a detailed discussion of published authentic texts of Geser represented by the Ekhirit-Bulagat and Ungin versions. Then, the features of archival versions of the epic are systematized and defined. The previous work on the plot composition and characters of each individual text is thoroughly compared to finally identify the features of the Buryat versions of the epic. Conclusion. The authors argue that the Ungin versions are quite close to the Mongolian ones, while the Ekhirit-Bulagat version, in their opinion, stands apart both in terms of their composition and themes. The introductory part of the uliger, a mythological prologue with a shamanic pantheon of deities, is characteristic only of the Buryat versions of Geser. Also, as far as the Western Buryat version is concerned, it may be pointed out that the influence of Buddhist teachings, which were not widespread in the heyday of the epic, was minimum. Of relevance are also the contaminations of the common Mongolian storytelling traditions with the characteristic motifs of the Central Asian epic. The identification of specific features of the local versions of Geser may expand our understanding of the specifics of the national epic as one of the main manifestations of traditional culture.


2020 ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
А.S. Salimov ◽  
S.V. Voronina

The bankruptcy estate of the debtor spouse is all property belonging to him both on the basis ofindividual and joint ownership, including unfulfilled property obligations. The composition of the propertyof spouses is determined by the rules of family law, taking into account the legal regulation of certain typesof property, which requires special attention when forming the bankruptcy estate of the debtor spouse. Thebankruptcy estate may include the property of a citizen, making up his share in the total property, which maybe levied in accordance with civil law, family law. Family relations are built on the principle of community,which affects the implementation of bankruptcy law. To foreclose on the share of the debtor spouse, it isnecessary to separate the share of the debtor spouse from the common property, while the bankruptcy lawallows the sale of common property with the subsequent payment of funds to the debtor’s spouse.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document