The Communicative Function of Legal Transplants in Mixed Legal Systems
https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2023.2.25.515-543
Abstract
The article analyzes the definition of the communicative function of law from the point of view of legal communication between the dependent legal systems of the former colonies. In this context, the “evergreen issue” arises about legal transplantation, the legal transfer of norms and institutions and reception of nomadic legal constructs. The modern comparative lexicon uses three types of metaphors related to the interaction of legal systems and their law hybridization: anthropomorphic, communicative and mechanical metaphors. Among the best-known cases of legal transplantation, the authors pay attention to the spread of codes, the diffusion of common law, and the emergence of mixed legal systems. They explore the positivist concept of “legal transplants,” which appeared in comparative discourse thanks to the theory of Alan Watson. The article discusses the comparative opposition to this theory — the so-called cultural concept of legal transplants (transferists vs. culturalist debate), as well as the musical metaphor “legal transposition” and the process of diffusion of law in dependent legal systems. The practice of legal transplants in mixed common law systems and their application in practice are analyzed in national jurisdictions. The article shows criminal legal bijuridism and the process of the so-called “diffuse codification” in India, Canada, Australia and other British former colonies, which is an example of codistics communication of dissimilar political and legal cultures and circulation of model codes between them. In conclusion, attention is drawn to the discourse of the effectiveness, applicability and effectiveness of transplants. It is concluded that the success — failure discourse of legal transplants depends on the degree of communicativeness of transplanted and receptive constructs, their ability to “speak” in an understandable language for the host cultural environment of law.
About the Authors
E. N. Trikoz
MGIMO University; Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of
Theory of Law and Comparative Law, International Law Faculty, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; Associate Professor, International Law Department, Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; Associate Professor of the Public Policy and History of State and Law Department, Law Institute, RUDN University
E. E. Gulyaeva
Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena E. Gulyaeva, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, International Law Department
References
1. Abel, R.L., (1982). Law as Lag: Inertia as a Social Theory of Law. Michigan Law Review, 80(4), pp. 785–809.
2. Abramov, A.E., (2005). Legal Acculturation (The Case Study of Spain during the Roman Republic). Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Vladimir. (In Russ.).
3. Ajani, G., (1995). By Chance and Prestige: Legal Transplants in Russia and Eastern Europe. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 43(1), pp. 93–117.
4. Alston, Ph., (1999). Review Essay: Transplanting Foreign Norms: Human Rights and Other International Legal Norms in Japan. The European Journal of International Law, 10(3), pp. 625–632.
5. Ancel, M., (1975). Book Review (Reviewing Legal Transplants, 1974). Revue Internationale De Droit Comparé, 27, pp. 303–304.
6. Antonov, M. and Denisenko, V., (2015). Thinking Law as Communication. Review of Central and East European Law, 40(2), pp. 189–201, doi: 10.1163/15730352-04002002.
7. Baxi, U., (2003). The Colonialist Heritage. In: Legrand, P., and Munday, R., (eds). Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Cambridge University Press. Pp. 46–75.
8. Bentham, J., (1802). Of the Influence of Time and Place in Matters of Legislation. In: Traités de législation civile et pénale. Paris. Vol. III.
9. Benton, L., (2001). Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Bois, F., and Visser, D., (2003). The Influence of Foreign Law in South Africa. Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 13, pp. 593–658.
11. Bowe, A.-M.M., (1985). Time of Nations: A Compilation. Transl. from French. International relations.
12. Bowring, B., (2021). The Problem of “Legal Transplantation” and Human Rights. Degradation of the International Legal Order? The Rehabilitation of Law and the Possibility of Politics. Transl. from English. Moscow. (In Russ.).
13. Brierley, J.E.C., (1992). Bijuridism in Canada. Contemporary Law, National Reports to the 1990 International Congress of Comparative Law. Cowansville, Québec, Yvon Blais.
14. Cairns, J.W., (2013). Watson, Walton and the History of Legal Transplants. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 41, pp. 637–696.
15. Carbonneau, Th.E., (2000). Legal Traditions of the World. Sustainable Diversity in Law: Book Review. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 48(4), 48, p. 729–732.
16. Carvalho, J., (2019). Law, Language, and Knowledge: Legal Transplants from a Cultural Perspective. The German Law Journal, 20(1), pp. 21–45, doi: 10.1017/glj.2019.4.
17. Chen, Lei, (2012). Contextualizing Legal Transplant: China and Hong Kong. In: Monateri, G.P., (ed.). Methods of Comparative Law. Edward Elgar Publ. Ltd. Pp. 192–209.
18. Cohn, M., (2010). Legal Transplant Chronicles: The Evolution of Unreasonableness and Proportionality Review of the Administration in the United Kingdom. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 58, pp. 583–629.
19. Cotterrell, R., (2001). Is There a Logic of Legal Transplants? In: Nelken, D. and Feest, J., (eds). Adapting Legal Cultures. Oxford Portland. Pp. 71–79.
20. Cuniberti, G., (2012). Enhancing Judicial Reputation Through Legal Transplants: Estoppel Travels to France. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 60, pp. 383–400.
21. Dean, M., (2011). Legal Transplants and Jury Trial in Japan. The Legal Studies, 31, pp. 570–590.
22. Denisenko, V.V. and Trikoz, E.N., (2018). Typology of mixed legal systems. Legal science and practice: Vestnik of Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2(42), pp. 29– 37. (In Russ.).
23. Denisova, E.M., (2012). Problem of Reception of Roman Law in Russia. Vestnik of Tver State University. Series: Law, 32, pp. 328–336. (In Russ.).
24. Di Martino, A., (2021). Circolazione delle soluzioni giuridiche e delle idee costituzionali. Questioni di metodo comparativo e prassi tra culture costituzionali e spazi globali. DPCE Online, 50, numero speciale. Pp. 743–870. (In Italian).
25. Ewald, W., (1995). Comparative Jurisprudence (II): The Logic of Legal Transplants. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 43(4), pp. 489–510.
26. Farran, S., Gallen, J., and Rautenbach, C., (2015). The Diffusion of Law. Farnham: Ashgate.
27. Foster, F.H., (2010). American Trust Law in a Chinese Mirror. The Minnesota Law Review, 94, pp. 602–610.
28. Foster, N., (2000). Company Theory in Comparative Perspective: England and France. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 48, p. 573–623.
29. Frankenberg, G., (2013). Constitutions as Commodities: Notes on a Theory of Transfer. In: Frankenberg, G., (ed.). Order from Transfer. Comparative Constitutional Design and Legal Culture. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton. Pp. 1–26.
30. Galinou, E.E., (2005). Legal Borrowing: Why Some Legal Transplants Take Root and Others Fail. Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal, 25, pp. 391–421.
31. Geoffrey, S., (2012). All that Heaven Allows: Are Transnational Codes a “Scientific Truth” or Are They Just a Form of Elegant “Pastiche”? In: Monateri, P.G., (ed.). The Methods of Comparative Law. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton. Pp. 165–191.
32. Grande, E., (2002). Imitazione e diritto: ipotesi sulla circolazione dei modelli. Torino. (In Italian). Grayson, D.A., (1981). In English Ways: The Movement of Societies and the Transfer of English Local Law and Custom to the Massachusetts Bay in the Seventeenth Century. W.W. Norton & Co.
33. Graziadei, M., (2019). Comparative Law as the Study of Transplants and Receptions. In: Mathias, R. and Zimmermann, R., (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. Oxford Handbooks. Pp. 442–475.
34. Halpérin, J.-L., (2010). Western Legal Transplants and India. Jindal Global Law Review, 2 (1), pp. 14–40.
35. Hay, D., (1984). The Criminal Prosecution in England and Its Historians. Modern Law Review, 47(1), pp. 1–29.
36. Hooker, M.B., (1975). Legal Pluralism: An Introduction to Colonial and Neo-Colonial Laws. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
37. Huxley, A., (2007). Jeremy Bentham on Legal Transplants. The Journal of Comparative Law, 2, pp. 177–188.
38. Inoue, K., (1991). MacArthur’s Japanese Constitution: A Linguistic and Cultural Study of its Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
39. Kahn-Freund, O., (1974). On Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law. Modern Law Review, 37 (1), pp. 2–5.
40. Krasheninnikova, N.A. and Trikoz, E.N., (2022). Criminal protection of women’s rights in India: History and modernity. Vestnik Sankt- Peterburgskogo Universiteta. Pravo, 13(1), pp. 230–245. (In Russ.).
41. Kuryshev, E.Yu., (2010). Legal Acculturation and Annihilation. Actual Problems of Modern Law Science and Practice [Aktual’nyye problemy sovremennoy yuridicheskoy nauki i praktiki], 4, pp. 41–54. (In Russ.).
42. Kyselova, T., (2008). The Concept of Legal Transplant: Literature Review. Draft 2008. Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, The University of Oxford. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/3371274/The_Concept_of_Legal_Transplant_Literature_Review_DRAFT_2008 [Accessed 11.09.2023].
43. Langer, M., (2004). From Legal Transplants to Legal Translations: The Globalization of Plea Bargaining and the Americanization Thesis in Criminal Procedure. The Harvard International Law Journal, 45(1), pp. 1–64.
44. Lau, M., (1994). The Reception of Common Law in India. In: Doucet, M. and Vanderlinden, J., (eds). La réception des systèmes juridiques: implantation et destin. Bruxelles: Bruylant. Pp. 1–25.
45. Legrand, P., (1997). The Impossibility of “Legal Transplant.” Maastricht Journal of European & Comparative Law, 4, pp. 111–124.
46. Legrand, P., (2001). What “Legal Transplants.” In: Nelken, D. and Feest, J., (eds). Adapting Legal Cultures. London: Hart Publ. Pp. 55–56.
47. Luther, J., (2009). Modelli giuridici europei nella Cina contemporanea. Napoli.
48. Maechling, Ch., (1975). Alan Watson. Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law: Book Review. The Virginia Journal of International Law, 15, pp. 1037–1038.
49. Mattei, U., (1994). Efficiency in Legal Transplants: An Essay in Comparative Law and Economics. International Review of Law and Economics, 14(1), pp. 3–19.
50. Menski, W., (2003). Hindu Law beyond Tradition and Modernity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
51. Muñiz, D.N., (2008). Recodification of Criminal Law in a Mixed Jurisdiction: The Case of Puerto Rico. Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, 12.1. Available at: https://studylib.net/doc/7702081/the-puerto-rico-penal-code-of-1902 [Accessed 11.09.2023].
52. Nelken, D., (2003). Comparatists and transferability. In: Legrand, P. and Munday, R., (eds). Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Cambridge University Press. Pp. 437–466.
53. Örücü, E., (1996). Mixed and mixing systems: A conceptual search. In: Örücü, E., Attwooll, E., and Coyle, S., (eds). Studies in Legal Systems: Mixed and Mixing. Kluwer Law International. Pp. 335–352.
54. Örücü, E., (1999). Critical Comparative Law: Considering Paradoxes for Legal Systems in Transition. Preadvies Nederlandse Vereniging voor Rechtsvergelijking, 59, pp. 1–195.
55. Örücü, E., (2002). Law as Transposition. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 51, pp. 205–223.
56. Örücü, E., (2013). Law as transposition. The Comparative Law, 1–2, pp. 102–120.
57. Pargendler, M., (2012). Politics in the Origin: The Making of Corporate Law in Nineteenth Century Brazil. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 60, pp. 805–806.
58. Perju, V., (2012). Constitutional Transplants, Borrowing, and Migrations. In: Rosenfield, M. and Sajo, A., (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law. Oxford University Press. Pp. 1306– 1308.
59. Reid, K. and Zimmermann, R., (eds), (2000). A History of Private Law in Scotland. Oxford University Press.
60. Rheinstein, M., (1968). Comparative Law — Its Functions, Methods and Usages. Arkansas Law Review, 22, pp. 416–425.
61. Roghina, R.C., (2020). The Theory of Forms Without Substance a Romanian Legal Transplant Theory Ahead of its Time. Journal of Legal Studies, 26, pp. 142–155.
62. Sacco, R. and Rossi, P., (2019). Introduzione al diritto comparator. Milano. (In Italian).
63. Sacco, R., (1974). Les buts et les méthodes de la comparaison du droit. Rapports nationaux italiens au IX Congrès international de droit comparé. Téhéran. Pp. 127–131. (In French).
64. Sacco, R., (1991). Legal Formants: A Dynamic Approach to Comparative Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 39(1), pp. 1–34.
65. Siems, M., (2018). Malicious Legal Transplants. Legal Studies, 38, pp. 103–119.
66. Sinyukov, V.N., (1995). Russian legal system: (questions of theory). Saratov. (In Russ.).
67. Small, R., (2005). Towards a Theory of Contextual Transplants. Emory International Law Review, 19, pp. 1431–1455.
68. Sokolskaya, L.V., (2009). Types of legal acculturation. Scientific Proceedings of the Moscow State Law Academy, 6. (In Russ.).
69. Sorokina, E.A., (2008). Legal Borrowing: Discussion of Metaphors. Vestnik Universiteta imeni O.E. Kutafina (MGYuA) [Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)], 5, pp. 28–34.
70. Taylor, G., (2008). The Law of the Land: The Advent of the Torrens System in Canada. Toronto.
71. Teubner, G., (1998). Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergences. Modern Law Review, 61, pp. 10–15.
72. Torres, E.A., (1976). The Puerto Rico Penal Code of 1902–1975: A Case Study of American Legal Imperialism. Revista Juridica de la Universidad de Puerto Rico, 45, pp. 42–73.
73. Travieso, J.A., Ferraro, A.V., Trikoz, E.N., and Gulyaeva, E.E., (2021). Bioethical Aspects of Human Rights in Modern Latin America. Kutafin Law Review, 8(1), pp. 85–98.
74. Twining, W., (2006). Diffusion and Globalisation Discourse. Harvard International Law Journal, 47, pp. 507–516.
75. Walton, F.P., (1902). The Relationship of the Law of France to the Law of Scotland. Juridical Review, 14, pp. 17–20.
76. Walton, F.P., (1927). The Historical School of Jurisprudence and Transplantations of Law. Journal of Comparative Legislation & International Law, 9(4), pp. 183–192.
77. Watson, A., (1974). Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law. Edinburgh, 2nd ed. Athens, 1993.
78. Watson, A., (1977). Society and Legal Change. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Watson, A., (1978). Comparative Law and Legal Change. The Cambridge Law Journal, 37(2), pp. 328–332.
79. Watson, A., (1993). Legal transplants an approach to comparative law. 2nd ed. Athens.
80. Watson, A., (1995). From Legal Transplants to Legal Formants. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 43(3), pp. 469–476.
81. Wiener, J., (2001). Responding to the Global Warming Problem. Something Borrowed for Something Blue: Legal Transplants and the Evolution of Global Environmental Law. Ecology Law Quarterly, 27, pp. 1295–1371.
82. Wise, E., (1990). The Transplant of Legal Patterns. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 38, Supplement. U.S. Law in an Era of Democratization.
Review
For citations:
Trikoz E.N., Gulyaeva E.E. The Communicative Function of Legal Transplants in Mixed Legal Systems. Kutafin Law Review. 2023;10(3):515-543. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2023.2.25.515-543
Views:
593
Email this article 
