How Long Is Too Long to Determine the Success of a Legal Transplant? International Doctrines and Contract Law in Oceania

doi:10.1017/9781108605991.007

6 - How Long Is Too Long to Determine the Success of a Legal Transplant? International Doctrines and Contract Law in Oceania

from Part II

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 June 2019

Jessica Viven-Wilksch

Edited by

Vito Breda

Show author details

Vito Breda: Affiliation:
University of Southern Queensland

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Legal transplants have captivated comparative scholars for more than four decades. Their definition, their relevance, their possible occurrence, and their danger have been analyzed. Legal transplants do exist and have been occurring for centuries. What the debate has highlighted over time is the fact that transplanting a legal doctrine, an institution, or a structure is a ‘dynamic process’. Contrary to Watson’s assertion that transplanting is socially easy the dynamic nature of the transplant process shows how complex the process can really be. Indeed it can take years for a legal system to identify a gap, for legal reform to be discussed, and for a legal system with a relevant ‘gap filler’ to be identified. This is only the start of a process that will lead to legal reform as a notion is merged with a legal system’s existing laws. And then the waiting game begins.

Type: Chapter
Information: Legal Transplants in East Asia and Oceania , pp. 132 - 157

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108605991.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

IX Bibliography

Alshorbagy, A., ‘On the Failure of a Legal Transplant: The Case of Egyptian Takeover Law’, Indiana International and Comparative Law Review 22 (2) (2012), 237.Google Scholar

Australian Government, Attorney General’s Department, Improving Australia’s Law and Justice Framework a Discussion Paper to Explore the Scope for Reforming Australian Contract Law (2012).Google Scholar

Bant, E. and Harding, M. (eds.), Exploring Private Law (Cambridge University Press, 2010) 41.Google Scholar

Berman, P. S., ‘The Inevitable Legal Pluralism within Universal Harmonization Regimes: The Case of the CISG’, Uniform Law Review 21 (2016), 23.Google Scholar

Bonell, M. J., ‘The UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts and Long-Term Contracts’ (position paper prepared for the Working Group on Long-Term Contracts, Principles of International Commercial Contracts, First session, Rome, 19–23 January 2015) www.unidroit.org/english/documents/2014/study50/s-50–126-e.pdf accessed 16 July 2018.Google Scholar

Bonell, M. J. ‘The CISG, European Contract Law and the Development of a World Contract Law’, American Journal of Comparative Law 56 (2008),1.Google Scholar

Bridge, Michael G, ‘Good Faith, the Common Law, and the CISG’, Uniform Law Review 22 (1) (2017), 98.Google Scholar

Cairns, J. W., ‘Watson, Walton and the History of Legal Transplants’, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law 41 (3) (2013), 637.Google Scholar

Carter, John, ‘Good Faith in Contract: Why Australian Law Is Incoherent’ (Legal Studies Research Paper No 14/38, Sydney Law School, 2014) https://ssrn.com/abstract=2421117 accessed 21 June 2018.Google Scholar

Chen-Wishart, M., ‘Legal Transplant and Undue Influence: Lost in Translation or a Working Misunderstanding?’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly 62 (1) (2013), 1.Google Scholar

Chianale, A., ‘The CISG as a Model Law: A Comparative Law Approach’, Singapore Journal of Law Studies [2016], 29.Google Scholar

Coyle, J. F., ‘The Role of the CISG in US Contract Practice: An Empirical Study’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 38 (2016), 195.Google Scholar

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ‘New Colombo Plan’ http://dfat.gov.au/people-to-people/new-colombo-plan/pages/new-colombo-plan.aspx accessed 21 June 2018.Google Scholar

Dharmananda, K. and Firios, L. (eds.), Long Term Contracts (Federation Press, 2013), 136.Google Scholar

DiMatteo, L. (ed.), International Sales Law: A Global Challenge (Cambridge University Press, 2014)Google Scholar

DiMatteo, L.Dhooge, L., Greene, S., Maurer, V. and Pagnattaro, M. ‘The Interpretive Turn in International Sales Law: An Analysis of Fifteen Years of CISG Jurisprudence’, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 34 (2004), 299.Google Scholar

DiMatteo, L.‘Contract Talk: Reviewing the Historical and Practical Significance of the Principles of European Contract Law’, Harvard International Law Journal 43 (2002), 569.Google Scholar

Estrella Faria, J. A., ‘Future Directions of Legal Harmonisation and Law Reform: Stormy Seas or Prosperous Voyage?’, Uniform Law Review 14 (2009), 5.Google Scholar

Felemegas, J., ‘Comparative Editorial Remarks on the Concept of Good Faith in the CISG and the PECL’, Pace International Law Review 13 (2001), 399.Google Scholar

Finn, P., ‘The UNIDROIT Principles: An Australian Perspective’, Australian International Law Journal 17 (2010), 193.Google Scholar

Gutteridge, H. C., Comparative Law: An Introduction to the Comparative Method of Legal Study and Research (Cambridge University Press, 1949), 25.Google Scholar

Hayward, B., ‘The CISG in Australia – The Jigsaw Puzzle Missing a Piece’, Vindobona Journal of International Commercial Law and Arbitration 14 (2) (2010), 193Google Scholar

Hofmann, N., ‘Interpretation Rules and Good Faith as Obstacles to the UK’s Ratification of the CISG and to the Harmonization of Contract Law in Europe’, Pace International Law Review 22 (2010), 145.Google Scholar

Honnold, J., Uniform Law for International Sales under the 1980 United Nations Convention (Wolters Kluwer, 1982).Google Scholar

Dahan, H., ‘The UNIDROIT Principles and their Influence in the Modernisation of Contract Law in the People’s Republic of China’, Uniform Law Review 8 (2003), 107.Google Scholar

Kanda, H. and Milhaupt, C. J., ‘Re-Examining Legal Transplants: The Director’s Fiduciary Duty in Japanese Corporate Law’, American Journal of Comparative Law 51 (4) (2003), 887.Google Scholar

Keily, T., ‘Good Faith and the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)’, Vindobona Journal of International Commercial Law and Arbitration 3 (1) (1999), 15.Google Scholar

Lando, O., ‘CISG and its Followers: A Proposal to Adopt Some International Principles of Contract Law’, American Journal of Comparative Law 53 (2005), 379.CrossRef Google Scholar

Le, N., ‘Rules of Interpretation of Contracts under the UNIDROIT Principles and Their Possible Adoption in Vietnamese Law’, Uniform Law Review 4 (2002), 1017, 1028–9.Google Scholar

Legrand, P., ‘The Impossibility of Legal Transplants’, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 4 (1997), 111.Google Scholar

MacNeil, I., ‘Relational Contract Theory: Challenges and Queries’, Northwestern University Law Review 94 (3) (2000), 877.Google Scholar

Michaels, R., ‘The UNIDROIT Principles as Global Background Law’, Uniform Law Review 19 (4) (2014), 643.CrossRef Google Scholar

Miller, J. M., ‘A Typology of Legal Transplants: Using Sociology, Legal History and Argentine Examples to Explain the Transplant Process’, American Journal of Comparative Law 51 (2003), 839.Google Scholar

Moss, S., ‘Why the United Kingdom Has Not Ratified the CISG’, Journal of Law and Commerce 25 (2005–2006), 483.Google Scholar

Nichols, P. M., ‘The Viability of Transplanted Law: Kazakhstani Reception of a Transplanted Foreign Investment Code’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 18 (4) (1997), 1235.Google Scholar

Nottage, L., ‘Who’s Afraid of the Vienna Sales Convention (CISG)? A New Zealander’s View from Australia and Japan’, Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 36 (2005), 815.Google Scholar

O’Hara O’Connor, E., ‘The Role of the CISG in Promoting Healthy Jurisdictional Competition for Contract Law’, Uniform Law Review 21 (2016), 41.Google Scholar

Oser, D., The Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts: A Governing Law? (Brill, 2008).Google Scholar

Ricardo, D., On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (John Murray, 1817).Google Scholar

Robertson, D., ‘Long-Term Relational Contracts and the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts’, Australian International Law Journal 17 (2010), 185.Google Scholar

Schlechtriem, P.(ed.), Einheitliches Kaufrecht and Nationales Obligationenrecht: Referate and Diskussionen der Fachtagung Einheitliches Kaufrecht am 16–17 2 1987 (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1987).Google Scholar

Schwenzer, I., ‘Global Unification of Contract Law’, Uniform Law Review 21 (2016), 60.Google Scholar

Schwenzer, I.Schlechtriem & Schwenzer: Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) 3rd edn (Oxford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar

Sheehy, B., ‘Good Faith in the CISG: The Interpretation Problems of Art 7’, Review of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (2007) 153.Google Scholar

Slaughter, A. M., A New World Order (Princeton University Press, 2005).Google Scholar

Smith, A., Wealth of Nations (Strahan and Cadell, 1776).Google Scholar

Smits, J. S. (ed.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law (Elgar, 2006) 434, 435.Google Scholar

Smythe, D. J., ‘Reasonable Standards for Contract Interpretation under the CISG’, Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law 25 (2016), 1.Google Scholar

Sarcevic, P. and Volken, P. (eds.), International Sale of Goods: Dubrovnik Lectures (Oceana Publications, 1985), 1.Google Scholar

Spagnolo, L., ‘Law Wars: Australian Contract Law Reform v. CISG v. CESL’, Villanova Law Review 58 (4) (2013), 623.Google Scholar

Stewart, A., ‘What’s Wrong with the Australian Law of Contract?’, Journal of Contract Law 29 (2012), 74.Google Scholar

Teubner, G., ‘Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergences’, Modern Law Review 61 (1998), 11.Google Scholar

UNIDROIT Secretariat, ‘Report to Working Group on Long-Term Contracts Second Session’ (Hamburg, 26–29 October 2015) see [43], [69], [19] respectively www.unidroit.org/english/documents/2016/study50/s-50-misc32-e.pdf accessed 16 July 2018.Google Scholar

UNIDROIT SecretariatItem No. 4 on the agenda: International Commercial Contracts – (b) Possible future work on long-term contracts’ UNIDROIT 2013 – C.D. (92) 4(b)) www.unidroit.org/english/governments/councildocuments/2013session/cd92-04b-e.pdf accessed 24 July 2018.Google Scholar

Wagner, G., ‘Termination and Cure under the Common European Sales Law’, Common Market Law Review 50 (2013), 147.Google Scholar

Watson, A., Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law (University of Georgia Press, 1974).Google Scholar

Wesiack, M., ‘Is the CISG Too Much Influenced by Civil Law Principles of Contract Law Rather Than Common Law Principles of Contract Law? Should the CISG Contain a Rule on the Passing of Property?’ (2004) CISG Database www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/wesiack.html accessed 21 June 2018.Google Scholar

Zeller, B., The Unidroit Principles of Contract Law; Is There Room for Their Inclusion into Domestic Contracts?’, Journal of Law and Commerce 26 (2006–2007), 115.Google Scholar

Zeller, B.‘‘Four-Corners – The Methodology for Interpretation and Application of the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods’ (2003) CISC Database, Article 7 www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/4corners.html accessed 21 June 2018.Google Scholar

Zeller, B.‘Good Faith – Is It a Contractual Obligation?’, Bond Law Review 15 (2) (2003), 215.Google Scholar