Abstract
This paper examines the limits of comparativism under two categories: those limits related to the comparatist herself—the intrinsic, and those related to other factors such as the context, the environment and the purpose, the limits of its use; the limits of its methodology; the limits of topics to be compared and so on—the extrinsic. These limits are not rigid and at times may overlap. Beyond these, the paper also delves into further challenges. As a final note, the paper reminds the reader that although comparative law is not a panacea to all our woes, the comparative lawyer will remain an essential actor in our century. She must endeavour to surpass the limitations enslaving both her, the intrinsic challenges, and her subject, the extrinsic challenges.
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
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Esin Örücü, Symbiosis between Comparative Law and Legal Theory – Limitations of Legal Methodology (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Mededelingen van het Juridisch Instituut nr.19, 1982).
- 2.
Otto Kahn-Freund, ‘Comparative Law as an Academic Subject’ (1966) 82 Law Quarterly Review, 40–41.
- 3.
Max Rheinstein, ‘Teaching Tools in Comparative Law’ (1952) 1 American Journal of Comparative Law, 107.
- 4.
Léontin Jean Constantinesco, Traite de Droit Compare, La Methode Comparative, Tome II (Libraire Generale deDroit et de Jurisprudence 1974) 289.
- 5.
I have looked into this subject elsewhere also. See Esin Örücü, The Enigma of Comparative Law – Variations on a Theme for the Twenty-First Century (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2004) Chapter 10.
- 6.
See Esin Örücü, ‘Some Problems and Pitfalls in Researching Law in Foreign Jurisdictions’, in Péter Cserne, István H Szilágyi, Miklós Könczöl, Máté Paksy, Péter Takács and Tattay, S (eds), Theatrvm Legale Nvndi: Symbola CS Varga Oblata, (Societaas Aancti Stephani 2007) 339–359.
- 7.
See Nigel Jamieson, ‘Source and Target-Oriented Comparative Law’, (1996) 44 American Journal of Comparative Law, 121.
- 8.
‘Bahşiş’ is a payment given as a ‘thank you’ for a service legally owed to you but which could be delayed in implementation but for it, ‘rüşvet’ is a payment to acquire an illegal interest.
- 9.
Volkmar Gessner, ‘Global Legal Interaction and Legal Cultures’, (1994) 7 Ratio Juris. However, this is not any more the case since the law has been amended.
- 10.
See Hannu Tapani Klami, ‘Comparative Law and Legal Concepts’, in Oikeustiede Jurisprudentia, ost- (1981) XIV Suomalaisen Lakimiesyhdistyksen Uosikirya (Vammala 1981) 67–166, for an intriguing and thorough discussion of the role and limits of comparative law, as well as the theoretical problems, legal dogmatics and contexts.
- 11.
This example was inspired by the one provided by Mitchel De S.-O.-L'E. Lasser, ‘The question of understanding’ in Pierre Legrand and Roderick Munday (eds), Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions (Cambridge University Press 2003) 237.
- 12.
Gardiol Van Neikerk, ‘Indigenous law and narrative: rethinking methodology’, (1999) XXXII CILSA 208. Also see Jacques Du Plessis, ‘Fairness and diversity in the South African law of contracts’, in Sean Patrick Donlan and Jane Mair (eds), Comparative Law: Mixes, Movements, and Metaphors (Juris Diversitas Series, Routledge 2020) Chapter 4, 47–66.
- 13.
See Esin Örücü, ‘A Legal System Based on Translation: The Turkish Experience’, (2013) 6 J.Civ.L.Srud., 445–473, available at https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol6/iss2/2/. Also see Esin Örücü, ‘One into Three: Spreading the Word, Three into One: Creating a Civil Law System’, (2015) 8 J.Civ.L.Stud., 381–407, available at http://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/jcls/vol8/iss2/3 accessed 1 December 2020.
- 14.
Bernhard Grossfeld, The Strength and Weakness of Comparative Law, (trans) Tony Weir (Clarendon Press 1990) 101.
- 15.
Harold Cooke Gutteridge, ‘The comparative aspects of legal terminology’, (1938) 12 Tulane Law Review 401–411, at 403.
- 16.
See Martin Weston, An English Reader’s Guide to the French Legal System (Berg Publishers 1991) for a most valuable contribution, specifically the first three chapters, pp 9–42.
- 17.
ibid 9, where Weston quotes Peter Newmark, ‘Twenty-three restricted rules of translation’, (1973) 12 Incorporated Linguists, 12. Also, for the ‘translation theory’ and some problems that may arise see Jamieson (n 7), 121.
- 18.
See for a severe criticism put forth, Gerard-René De Groot, ‘The quality of bilingual dictionaries’, (2000) 7 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 331–335, who says that out of approximately one hundred bilingual dictionaries, only six can meet the requirements of the comparative lawyer.
- 19.
See Olivier Moréteau, ‘The Words of Comparative Law’ in Esin Örücü & Sue Farran (eds), (2019) 6(2) Journal of International and Comparative Law, Special Issue: The Relevance of Comparative Legal Studies in the Twenty First Century, 183–208.
- 20.
Robert Alexy, The Nature of Arguments about the Nature of Law, in Lukas H Meyer, Stanley L Paulson, and Thomas W Pogge (eds), Rights, Culture, and the Law (Oxford University Press 2003) 3–16.
- 21.
Joseph Raz, ‘On the Nature of Law’, (1996) Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 1–25, at 6.
- 22.
See, Esin Örücü, ‘Methodological Aspects of Comparative Law’, (2006) VIII (1) European Journal of Law Reform, 29–42.
- 23.
Pierre Legrand, Fragments on Law-as-Culture (Deventer, W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink 1999) 13.
- 24.
ibid 18.
- 25.
See the works of The Commission of European Family Law summarized by Katharina Boele-Woelki, ‘The Commission of European Family law: Taking Stock after almost Twenty Years’, (2019) Journal of International and Comparative Law, Special Issue: E, 233–244.
- 26.
See, for example, the ten contributions full of vigor and innovation in Esin Örücü & Sue Farran (eds), (2019) 6(2) Journal of International and Comparative Law, Special Issue: The Relevance of Comparative Legal Studies in the Twenty First Century.
- 27.
See Esin Örücü, ‘Family Trees for Legal Systems: Towards a Contemporary Approach’, in Mark Van Hoecke (ed) Epistemology and Methodology of Comparative Law (Hart Publishing, European Academy of Legal Theory Series 2004, Chapter 18, 359–375.
- 28.
For ‘extraordinary’ places, see Esin Örücü, ‘Comparatists and extraordinary places’, in Pierre Legrand and Roderick Munday (eds), Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions (Cambridge University Press 2003) 467–489.
- 29.
See Ádám Fuglinszky, (2019) ‘Applied Comparative Law in Central Europe’, in Esin Örücü & Sue Farran (eds), (2019) 6(2) Journal of International and Comparative Law, Special Issue: The Relevance of Comparative Legal Studies in the Twenty First Century, 245–272.
- 30.
Jan Smits, ‘Systems Mixing and in Transition: Import and Export of Legal Models: The Dutch Experience’, in EH Hondius (ed), Netherlands Reports to the Fifteenth International Congress of Comparative Law (Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen 1998) 63.
- 31.
ibid 57.
- 32.
See contributions in JICL 2019, (n 26).
- 33.
William Twining, ‘Comparative Law and Legal Theory: The Country and Western Tradition’, in Ian Edge (ed), Comparative Law in Global Perspective (Transnational Publishers 2000), 21.
- 34.
Esin Örücü, ‘A Family Law For Europe: Necessary, Feasible, Desirable?’ in Katharina Boele-Woelki (ed), Perspectives for the Unification and Harmonisation of Family Law in Europe (Intersentia 2003) 571.
- 35.
ibid 572.
- 36.
Esin Örücü, Critical Comparative Law: Considering Paradoxes for Legal Systems in Transition, Nederlandse Vereniging Voor Rechtsvergelijking No 59 [Preliminary Report for the Dutch Association of Comparative Law] (Deventer, Kluwer 1999), 132.
- 37.
Van Hoecke, ‘Do “Legal Systems” Exist? The Concept of Law and Comparative Law’, Chapter 3 in Seán Patrick Donlan and Lukas Heckendoon Urscheler (eds), Concepts of Law, Comparative, Jurisprudential and Social Science Perspectives (Juris Diversitas Series, Ashgate 2014), 43–58.
- 38.
Hans W Baade, ‘Comparative Law and the Practitioner’, (1983) 31(3) The American Journal of Comparative Law 499–510, at 508.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Örücü, E. (2021). The Limits and Challenges of Comparativism. In: John, M., Devaiah, V.H., Baruah, P., Tundawala, M., Kumar, N. (eds) The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law 2019. The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2175-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2175-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-2174-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-2175-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)