Advertisement

Comparative Law in European Legal Adjudication

  • Markku Kiikeri
Part of the Law and Philosophy Library book series (LAPS, volume 50)

Abstract

The objective in this part of the book is to consider the “practice” of comparative reasoning in law from the point of view of the ideas developed in the previous chapters. This means an examination of the value-based argumentative and justificatory restrictions and the determination of the scope of the use of comparative observations in legal decision-making institutions. In this way one may be able to determine the limits of traditional uses of comparative law in the traditional theory of legal discourse. Only by making some conclusions on the instrumental and value-based adjudicative uses on these empirical basis, one is able to check the validity of the premises developed in the previous chapters, and, on the other hand, to consider the validity of comparative considerations from the point of view of the value-based theory of legal justifications.

Keywords

Legal System Collective Bargaining National Court Collective Agreement Advocate General 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 202.
    For some analysis, see Kiikeri, M., 1999, pp.312–317.Google Scholar
  2. 209.
    omparative interpretation plays a practical role in many states, see the remarks on the use of comparative legal analysis in private law in Greece, Turkish, Dutch, Luxemburg, French, Belgium, Swiss, German, Austria, Czech Republic, Marsh, N.S., 1977, p.656. The basic use has been seen in lacunae filling.Google Scholar
  3. Swiss courts refer sometimes to German, Italian, Austrian law, Marsh, N.S., 1977, and references. Remarks on wide use of comparative material in Swiss Courts, see Aubin, B., 1970, p. 480.Google Scholar
  4. 221.
    Also, Summer, R.S., Taruffo, M., 1991, pp.508–509. The philosophy may also be related to the philosophy of history in these systems, see Legrand, P., 1996, p.71 ff.Google Scholar
  5. 222.
    The legal process is discursive in the sense that the task of the judges is not to make any preliminary studies or ad hoc studies on the correct material for the law. The material is more or less presented in the legal processes. This seems to differ, to a certain extent, from the idea in continental systems. (Lawson, F., 1977, pp.365–366.) This related to the differences in the significance of systematization (Legrand, P., 1996, p.65 ff.).Google Scholar
  6. 223.
    See, for example, David, R., Brierly, J.E.C., 1978, Zweigert, K., Kötz, H., 1977, Schlesinger, R.B., 1980 and 1995 (pp.480–481 on reasoning and structural differences in general (for example, law and equity)). Gorla, G. (1980, p.308) maintains that what is often forgotten is that the distinction between common law and continental (civil law) was being used already in 16th century English legal literature. Furthermore, the return to this discussion was a phenomenon of the nationalistic English historiography of the modern age. Moreover, this distinction was taken by the continentals as an self-evident distinction from the beginning of 19th century.Google Scholar
  7. 228.
    See, Zweigert, K., Kötz, H., 1977, p.274 ff., referring to Keeton, G.W., Social Change in the Law of Trusts (1958), without, however, a thorough historical-contextual study concerning the “public” dimension of the institution.Google Scholar
  8. 229.
    Zweigert, K., Kötz, 1977, p.278 ff.. See also, Drobnig, U., 1972, p. 124.Google Scholar
  9. 230.
    For some discussion, see Rabel, É., 1978, pp.88–90.Google Scholar
  10. 231.
    See, Legrand, P., 1996, pp.70–71. This makes a distinction, at least formally, between English and the United States legal systems.Google Scholar
  11. 232.
    Pollock, F., Sir, The expansion of the common law (South Hackensack, NJ) 1974, pill if Maitland, F.E., The constitutional history of England: a course of lectures delivered by F. W. Maitland (Cambridge).Google Scholar
  12. However, the same tendencies can be found in the attempt to “secularize” natural law thinking during the modem era, even if the context and forms of realization of this objective was different (see, Capelletti, M., 1989, pp.127–128). For the United States, see ibid, p.130.Google Scholar
  13. 237.
    Capelletti, M., 1989, p.144, Markesinis, P., 1990, p.20. See also, Sacco, 1991, p.321, 346. For some historical analysis, see Gorla, G., Moccia, L., 1981, p.147. For judicial precedents in some continental countries in legal history, see ibid. p.150.Google Scholar
  14. 238.
    See for further analysis, Capelletti, M., 1989, pp. 144–146.Google Scholar
  15. 240.
    Zweigert, K., Kötz, H., 1987, p.34, Goutal, J.L., 1996, p.117. Legrand, P. (1996, p.65) has suggested that the reasoning on common law is analogical, and in continent institutional (referring to Samuel, G., The foundations of Legal reasoning, 1994 ).Google Scholar
  16. 253.
    Hartley, T.C., 1994, p.195 ff., Mathijsen, P.S.R.F., 1990, p.308. According to current law, states may be penalized for not complying with Community obligations (Amsterdam Treaty). On the other hand, States may be obliged to compensate damage resulting from the failure to implement Community provisions (case 6, 9/90 Francovich v. Italy (1991) ECR I5357).Google Scholar
  17. 263.
    For the role of the European Court of Human Rights on this issue, see Martens, S.K. 1998, p.8.Google Scholar
  18. 264.
    On the temporal and territorial scope, see Jacobs, E.G., 1975, pp.12–14.Google Scholar
  19. 271.
    See, Green, L.C., 1967, pp.42–66. International element as a basis of comparative interpretation, see Schlesinger, 1980, p. 29.Google Scholar
  20. 273.
    On the theories and nature of different types of systems, see Reuter, P., 1995, p.17Google Scholar
  21. 274.
    See also, Kiikeri, M., 1999, pp. 312–317.Google Scholar
  22. 275.
    For detailed analysis, see Kiikeri, M., 1999, p. 264 ff.Google Scholar
  23. 284.
    Lord Irvine of Lairg, 1998, pp.230–231, also, Gordon, A., 1998. Jolowicz, J.A. (1994, p.750) observed (1994) that comparative law has not been used in connection to European Community law. Some references, however, can be found from the contemporary case law.Google Scholar
  24. 291.
    Jolowicz, J.A. (1994, p.753, referring to studies by Markesis, B.) Suggests that the references to continental systems, in cases where there is an international connection, is more contrasting, whereas the references to common law systems are more practical.Google Scholar
  25. 292.
    On the fact that this use relates often to personal connections of an individual judge with his foreign colleagues, Lord Woolf, Foreword. In: Markesinis, B., Foreign Law and Comparative Methodology (Oxford) 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 300.
    Case NJA, 1983, p.3, study of British system, especially the case Sandman vBreach [1927] concerning International Convention on Oil Pollution (1969).Google Scholar
  27. 301.
    Peczenik, A., Bergholz, G., 1991, pp.330–331, referring to Eckhoff, T., Rettskildalaere (2 ed., Oslo) 1987, p. 256.Google Scholar
  28. 302.
    Peczenik, A., Bergholz, G., 1991, p.330, referring to Sundberg, J.W.F., Fradda Edda til Ekelöf Lund, Studenliteratur/Akademisk Förlag, 1978, p. 188.Google Scholar
  29. 317.
    Stem, K., Der Statsrecht der Bundesrepublic Deutchland, vol 2, 1980, p. 331.Google Scholar
  30. 325.
    For a list of cases and some analysis, see Pegoraro, L., 1987, pp.601–612. Apart from finding elasticity, the Court seems to search for rational and more permanent tendencies (ibid., pp.612–613). For some analysis, see de Vergotti, G., 1993, pp. 12–15.Google Scholar
  31. 341.
    Hazard, J.N., 1973. In Australia, see Bates, F., 1981, p.259 ff.Google Scholar
  32. 369.
    In general on the proof of foreign law, see Hartley, T.C., 1996, p.271 ff.Google Scholar
  33. 370.
    For some analysis, Kahn-Freund, 0., 1976, p.279.Google Scholar
  34. 373.
    Schmitthoff, M. (1941, p.107 ff.) Has maintains that “applied comparative law begins just where the Conflict of laws end, namely in examining the contents of the different legal systems and submitting the transaction to that system which is the most appropriate to it”.Google Scholar
  35. 374.
    Valladâo, H., 1961, p.112. It has even been claimed that the interest in comparative law in commercial law is a result of the “universal” nature of the latter ibid.,, referring to Jaeger, P.G., Comparazione e diritto commerciale. In: L’apporto della comparazione alla scienza giuridica (Milano), 1980, p. 303.Google Scholar
  36. 380.
    On interpretation, see Hartley, T.C., 1994, pp.85–86.Google Scholar
  37. 385.
    See, Schemers, G., Waelbroeck, D., 1987, p.11 ff., and Millett, T., 1988, p.163 ff., who is making a distinction between literal, schematic, teleological, [comparative] linguistic, autonomous-conceptual, general-principled, non-retroactive, restrictedly deviating, travaux preparatoires, effectiveness (“effet utile”).Google Scholar
  38. 404.
    See, Schermers, H.G., 1979, pp.171–172, see case 21–24/72, International Fruit Company (1972) ECR 1226.Google Scholar
  39. 411.
    On the concept, see Herczegh, G., 1978, p.73–76.Google Scholar
  40. Case Lotus (1927) PICJ Reports, p.19.Google Scholar
  41. 414.
    See, Koopmans, T., 1996, p.501 (from France comes, for example, the misuse of power doctrine, the non-expression of the dissenting opinions, the role of Advocate General). See also, Schwarze, J., 1991, p. 4.Google Scholar
  42. 415.
    See also Usher, J.A., 1976, pp. 362–368. For the types of concepts have been taken, see Koopmans, T., 1996, p.547. What is its role, Markesinis, B., 1993, p. 634.Google Scholar
  43. 430.
    On the influences to administrative law, its development, and the problems of comparative basis of it, see Schwarze, J., 1991, p.5 ff.Google Scholar
  44. 433.
    Schermers, H.G., 1979, p.169, analysis of the case 41/74 van Duyn (definition of state competencies, discrimination based on nationality) ECR (1974) 1351.Google Scholar
  45. 594.
    See Unger, J.A., 1976, pp.370–373, a case-study of the extensive comparative analysis by Advocate General Warner and a rule introduction by the Court in the case 17/74 Transocean Marine Paint Association v Commission (1974) ECR 1963. “The right to be heard” was found to be part of the Article 164 of the Rome Treaty.Google Scholar
  46. 595.
    Interest in US law can be also result of the fact that German and English law have been strongly influenced by it, Bredimas, A., 1978a, pp. 132–133.Google Scholar
  47. 597.
    On this type of exercise, see Gutteridge, H.C., 1944, pp.5–7.Google Scholar
  48. 598.
    For some indications of this type of approach, Pescatore, P., 1980, p. 350.Google Scholar
  49. 606.
    For some analysis, de Wilmars, J.M., 1991, p.39.Google Scholar
  50. 609.
    Pescatore, P., 1980, p.348. Pescatore sees this to be due to its connections with permanent representations and also because of the material it has due to its law-proposing function.Google Scholar
  51. 650.
    Some analysis of the idea of “subsidiarity” in the European Human Rights system is provided by van der Meersch, W.J.G., 1980, p.328 (Belgian linguistic and Handyside cases).Google Scholar
  52. 663.
    With regard to tendencies approach, see Schreuer, C.H., 1971, pp.275–277 (Otto Preminger Institute).Google Scholar
  53. 698.
    Some analysis of the margin ofappreciation, see van der Meersch, W.J.G., 1980, pp.330–331. On possible changes in this respect (toward a more universalistic approach) via institutional changes and the obligatory nature of the jurisdiction, see Martens, K.S., 1998, p. 10.Google Scholar
  54. 701.
    See in this respect, van der Meersch, W.J.G., 1980, p.318.Google Scholar
  55. 711.
    Pekkanen, R., On the evolutive interpretation of the European Human Rights Convention [Euroopan ihmisoikeussopimuksen evolutiivisesta tulkinnasta]. In: Lakimies, 1991, p. 360.Google Scholar
  56. 712.
    It has been claimed, in the context of Community law, that the studies in each case are very concrete ( Pescatore, P., 1980, p. 345 ).Google Scholar
  57. 738.
    Some analysis of the case may be found also in Grabenwarter, C., 1995, pp. 128–165. He maintains that the Court does not discuss in detail the content and the purpose of the film. Furthermore, the emphasis of the regional circumstances by the Court is remarkable, especially in terms of the use of statistical information. Basically his criticism is related to the extension of the justification.Google Scholar
  58. 785.
    Vousden, S. (2000, p.183) maintains that the inconclusiveness of his comparative review threw him back to the wording of the Article 85(1)“. Nevertheless, it is clear that the his interpretation was no textual in nature.Google Scholar
  59. 801.
    Also, Gyselen, L. (2000) p. 433.Google Scholar
  60. 829.
    See also, COLCOM, p.44 ff., for Spain, Finland, Sweden, see COLCOM, p.57. Gyselen, L. (2000) p. 448.Google Scholar
  61. 839.
    Some analysis, Gyselen, L. (2000) p.443. He claims that such collective ageements are not exceptional at all.Google Scholar
  62. 840.
    However, one could interpret the reasoning ofthe United States Supreme Court on these basis, and explain the existence of the Clayton Act 1914 in the United States. In Europe, the relationship between collective agreeing and competition law is regulated on the level of competition law - if at all (on this, Sulkunen, 0., (2000) pp.146–147).Google Scholar
  63. 881.
    On differences between women, Nieminen, L., 1996, pp. 30–31.Google Scholar
  64. 887.
    See, for example, Kosonen, P., 1996, pp.16–17, pp.150–151, and Rokkan, S., 1981, and Nieminen, L., 1996, p.28 ff (referring to Esping-Andersen, G., Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, 1990 and his distinction between liberal, conservative, Latin, and social-democratic types of welfare regimes).Google Scholar
  65. 891.
    Thorkildsen, D., 1997 (Religious Identity and Nordic identity), Ostergärd, U., 1997 (The geopolitics of Nordic identity, from composite states to nation-states. Political and religious characteristics), and Aronsson, P., 1997 (Local Politics, The invisible Political Culture, p.173 ff.).Google Scholar
  66. 894.
    See, Kosonen, P., 1996. On 19th century policy ideas related to charity in Sweden, see Trägârd, L., 1997, p.258. Centrality and functionality approach, idem.. No tested assistance idea (ibid., p.254). Pragmatism in general, Strâth, B., Sorensen, Ø., 1997, p.16. See as well, Zweigert, K., Kötz, H., 1987, p. 288.Google Scholar
  67. 895.
    For the idea of social integrity in the Swedish context, see Trägård, L., 1997, p.273.Google Scholar
  68. 899.
    Problems in European Union, see Trägård, L., 1997, p.284 ff., Sträth, B., Sorensen, Ø., 1997, p. 23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markku Kiikeri
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations