Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:07:02.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Many Laws, Many Legalities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2011

Bruce Kercher
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Peter Karsten asks why there might be a greater comparative propensity among CANZ historians than among those of the United States. Part of the reason may lie in the legal education many of us in Australia received, and in the formal legal status of many commonwealth countries until recently. As recently as the early 1970s, Australian law students were taught that English law was as significant as that made in the Australian courts. Appeals from the Australian Supreme Courts to the Privy Council were finally abolished only in 1986. From that time onward, there was a drive within the law schools to find differences from England, to look toward comparisons with other places than England.

Type
Forum: Response
Information
Law and History Review , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , Fall 2003 , pp. 621 - 622
Copyright
Copyright © the American Society for Legal History, Inc. 2003

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.)

References

1. See Karsten, Peter, “The CANZ Approach to Legal History,” Law and History Review 21 (Fall 2003): 615–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. See Rosemary Hunter, “Australian Legal Histories in Context,” ibid., 607–14.