Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide insights into the role of codification in a number of countries around the world, based on the author’s experiences in legal education and in law reform. In each case the author looks at the various codifications in the context of the country’s history and its own legal culture.
This paper is based on informal remarks delivered at the opening session of the International Academy of Comparative Law Congress on Codification held in Taipei, May 24–26, 2012. The author would like to express his gratitude for the help of Bianca Lin in transcribing his original remarks and assisting in preparation of this final version.
Professor Emeritus, University of Michigan School of Law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For an overview of these developments, see W. Gray, “E Pluribus Unum? A Bicentennial Report on Unification of Law in the US” 50 Rabelszeitschrift 111–165 (1986).
- 2.
See R. Pascal, “Report on French Civil Code Revision Project” 11 La. L. Rev. Vol. 2, p. 23 (1951).
- 3.
For an overview of the continuing influence of the Code civil, see X. Blanc-Jouvan, “Worldwide Influence of the French Civil Code of 1804” in Cornell Law School Papers, Number 3 (2004).
- 4.
For an incisive review of the process in Germany, see M. Reimann, “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Reform of the German Law of Obligations” 83 Tul. L. Rev. 877 (2008–2009).
- 5.
For a thorough treatment of this revision, see R. Zimmerman, the new german law of obligations (Oxford U. Press 2005).
- 6.
See generally W. Gray, “Soviet Tort Law: The New Principles Annotated” 1964 U. Ill. L. F. 180–211 (1964).
- 7.
civil code of the russian federated socialist republic, (English trans. By W. Gray and R. Stults) (Ann Arbor 1965).
- 8.
“General Principles of Civil Law,” (English trans. by W. Gray and R. Zheng) 34 Am. J. Comp. L. 715–743 (1986), and the later interpretive opinion of the Chinese Supreme Court in Law and Contemporary Problems, Spring 1989, p. 27 ff.
- 9.
The General Principles have not yet been superseded by the subsequent comprehensive statutues. In 2012 a professor at Peking University devoted the first part of his civil law course to full coverage of the General Principles.
- 10.
See generally J. Head, law codes in Dynastic China, (Carolina Academic Press 2005).
- 11.
For examples see W. Gray, “Use and Non-Use of Contract Law in Japan,” 17 Law in Japan 97–119 (1984).
- 12.
See “Working Group on Revision of Civil Code” (Japan Ministry of Justice 2012 ff.).
- 13.
See C.F.G. Sunryati Hartono, “Indonesian Law on Contracts, (IDE JETRO) (Japan 2001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gray, W. (2014). Codification, Decodification and Recodification: History, Politics and Procedure. In: Wang, WY. (eds) Codification in International Perspective. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03455-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03455-3_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03454-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03455-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)