A GJ Advances article.

Abstract

This article examines critically the assertion that lawyers from common law and civil law backgrounds cannot truly understand one another. This idea belongs to a more general reflection about comparative law, identifying law as culture. The present enquiry into the use of comparative law as a tool for investigating the relationship between law and culture addresses three main issues. First, what does "culture" mean and how should it be defined ? It is suggested that each country has a multifaceted culture and that law and culture do not necessarily mirror one another. Secondly, the alleged markedly different mentalities of lawyers and their legal cultures are examined. It is suggested that a contextualist and cultural approach to comparative law, aimed at finding differences, is perhaps necessary but also reductive. Thirdly, in reply to the allegation that comparative lawyers do not spend sufficient time theorising about law, it is submitted that comparative law inevitably has methodological and theoretical aims. As a result, rather than concentrating on an exclusive bias towards the search for commonalities or differences, it is proposed that the art of comparative law is to compare and contrast : a two-headed monster indeed.

Originally published in Global Jurist Advances.

Recommended Citation

Sefton-Green, Ruth (2001) "Compare and contrast : monstre à deux têtes," Global Jurist Advances: Vol. 1 : Iss. 3, Article 1.
Available at: http://www.bepress.com/gj/advances/vol1/iss3/art1