پیوند حقوقی موفق در پرتو آموزه‌های حقوق تطبیقی

مقالات آماده انتشار

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسنده

گروه حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران‏

چکیده

پیوند حقوقی که به اقتباس از حقوق خارجی اشاره دارد، امروزه یکی از الگوواره‌های اصلی حقوق تطبیقی محسوب می‌شود. با این حال، بحث از عوامل مؤثر بر موفقیت پیوند حقوقی در مطالعات این حوزه به اندازۀ کافی پرورانده نشده است. هدف نگارندۀ مقالۀ پیش ‌رو بررسی مفهوم پیوند حقوقی موفق و تلاش برای استخراج مهم‌ترین عوامل مؤثر بر موفقیت پیوندهای حقوقی است. تبیین این موضوع به‌ویژه در موارد بهره‌گیری از حقوق خارجی اهمیت فراوانی دارد. روش مطالعه در این مقاله، تحلیلی- توصیفی با بهره‌گیری از مطالعات موردی و ارجاع به مصادیق تاریخی است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد موفقیت پیوند حقوقی مفهومی مقید به زمان و طیف‌پذیر است که برای ارزیابی آن می‌توان از معیار سه‌گانۀ نتیجه‌بخشی، اثرگذاری و کارایی بهره برد. در این پژوهش، درجۀ پیوندپذیری موضوع، ضرورت رعایت تناسب حقوقی و غیرحقوقی میان منبع و گیرنده و نیز بومی‌سازی به‌عنوان عوامل مؤثر بر موفقیت پیوند حقوقی استخراج شده است. این پژوهش نشان می‌دهد هرچند در هر فرایند پیوند حقوقی درجه‌ای از هم‌گرایی میان قواعد حقوقی منبع و گیرنده صورت می‌پذیرد، در بسیاری موارد لازم است درجه‌ای از واگرایی نیز موضوع پیوند را با ویژگی‌های خاص گیرنده تطبیق دهد تا احتمال موفقیت افزایش یابد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Successful Legal Transplant in the Light of Comparative Law ‎Teachings

نویسنده [English]

  • Hasna Haj Najafi
Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehran, Iran.‎
چکیده [English]

Legal transplant, which refers to the adoption of foreign law, represents a principal paradigm within the contemporary discipline of comparative law. However, the factors contributing to the success of such transplants remain under-explored. This article investigates the concept of successful legal transplant, aiming to identify key factors influencing the effectiveness of legal adoptions. This inquiry is particularly relevant given the increasing reliance on foreign legal models in rulemaking. Employing an analytical-descriptive methodology, the article examines historical examples of legal transplants for its purpose. The findings suggest that the success of a legal transplant is a context-dependent and dynamic concept, assessable through the three criteria of efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency. The research identifies the transplantability of the legal subject matter, the legal and extra-legal fit between the source and recipient legal systems, and the process of domestication as crucial determinants of success. While acknowledging the inherent degree of convergence between legal elements of the source and recipient in any transplant, the article argues that a degree of divergence is often necessary to adapt the transplanted phenomenon to the specific characteristics of the recipient context and thereby enhance the likelihood of successful transplantation. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Comparative law
  • ‎ Legal adoption
  • ‎ Legal domestication
  • Legal ‎transplant
  • Successful ‎legal transplant.‎

مراجع

  1. Adams, Maurice, Heirbaut, Dirk (2014). Prolegomena to the Method and Culture of Comparative Law. In The Method and Culture of Comparative Law Essays in Honour of Mark Van Hoecke. Edited by Adams & Heirbaut, Oxford, Hart Publishing. 1-21.
  2. Afshar, Hassan (1976). General Principles of Comparative Law. Tehran: University of Tehran Publishing Institute (In Persian).
  3. Afshar, Hassan (2018). A Summary of the Characteristics of Different Stages of Comparative Law Studies and Its Constructive Role. Developments of Private Law (a Collection of Articles in the Memoirs of Professor Emami), under the supervision of Katouzian, Nasser. Tehran: Ganj Danesh. 411-430 (In Persian).
  4. Ajani, Gianmaria (2019). Legal Transplants, In Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. Edited by Marciano & Ramello. New York: Springer.1282-1288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_731.
  5. Al-Dabbagh, Harith (2013). Le Droit Comparé Comme Instrument de Modernisation: L’exemple des Codifications Civiles des États arabes du Moyen-Orient. Revue de droit de l'Université de Sherbrooke. 43. 387-441.
  6. Arvind, TT (2010). The Transplant Effect in Harmonization. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 59(1). 65-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589309990017 .
  7. Asimi, Hamidreza; Mahmoudi Janki, Firuz (2024). Evaluating “Legal Transplant” Prospects for Reforms in Criminal Law and Its Limitations. Comparative Law Review, 15 (1), 1-22. DOI: https://doi.com/10.22059/JCL.2023.353151.634457 (In Persian).
  8. Bergel, Jean Louis (1998). Principal Features and Methods of Codification. Louisiana Law Review. 48 (5). 1073-1097.
  9. Berkowitz, Daniel, Pistor, Katharina, Richard, Jean-Francois (2003). The Transplant Effect. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 51 (1). 163-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3649143
  10. Blandine, Mallet-Bricout (2013). The Trustee: mainspring, or only a cog, in the Frenchfiducie? In The Worlds of the Trust. Edited by Smith, Lionel, New York: Cambridge University Press. 141-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139505994.009 .
  11. Cohn, Margit (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(3). 583-629. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5131/ajcl.2009.0048.
  12. Cooter, Robert, Ginsburg, Thomas (2003). Leximetrics: Why the Same Laws Are Longer in Some Countries than Others, online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=456520#
  13. Cotterell, Roger (2001). Is there a Logic of Legal Transplants?. In Adapting Legal Cultures. Edited by Nelken & Feest. Hart Publishing. 109-126. DOI:10.4324/9781351217989-8.
  14. Cotterell, Roger (2003). Comparatists and Sociology. Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Edited by Legrand & Munday. Cambridge University Press. 131-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511522260.006.
  15. David, René, John, Brierley (1985). Major Legal Systems in the World Today: An Introduction to the Comparative Study of Law. 3rd edition, London: Stevens & Sons.
  16. De Cruz, Peter (2002). Legal Transplants: Principles and Pragmatism in Comparative Family Law, In Comparative Law in the 21st Century. Edited by Harding & Örücü. The Hague: Kluwer. 101-119.
  17. De Fumichon, Bruno de Loynes (2013). Introduction au droit compare: Maître de conférences à l'école de droit de la Sorbonne, vol.2. Association de législation comparée des pays du Pacifique.
  18. Dewar, John (1998). The Normal Chaos of Family Law. The Modern Law Review. 61(4). 467-485.
  19. Dezalay, Yves, Garth, Bryant G. (2002). The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  20. Douglas, James (2013). Trusts and Their Equivalents in Civil Law Systems: Why Did the French Introduce the fiducie into the Civil Code in 2007? What Might its Effects Be?". Queensland University of Technology Law Review, 13(1). 19-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5204/qutlr.v13i1.531 .
  21. Fedtke, Jörg (2012). Legal Transplants. In Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law. Edited by Smits, Jan.M., 2nd edition, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 550-554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781006108.00049 .
  22. Foster, Nicholas H. D. (2007). Comparative Commercial Law: Rules or Context?. In Comparative Law: A Handbook. Edited by Örücü & Nelken. Oxford: Hart. 263-285.
  23. Foster, Nicholas H. D. (2002). Transmigration and Transferability of Commercial Law in a Globalised World. Comparative Law in the 21st Century. Edited by Harding & Örücü. The Hague: Kluwer. 55-73.
  24. Galinout, Eirini Elefthenia (2004). Legal Borrowing: Why Some Legal Transplants Take Root and Others Fail. Journal of Comparative Labour Law Policy. 25. 391-422.
  25. Gannage, Pierre (2007). L’influence du Code civil sur les codifications des États du Proche- Orient, In The Influence of the French Civil Code on the Common Law and Beyond. Edited by Fairgrieve, Duncan. London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law. 476-494.
  26. Gillespie, John (2008). Towards a Discursive Analysis of Legal Transfers into Developing East Asia. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics. 40. 657-721.
  27. Glenn, Patrick (2010). Legal Traditions of the World. 4th edition, Oxford University Press.
  28. Graziadei, Michele (2008). Comparative Law as the Study of Transplants and Receptions. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. In Reimann & Oxford: Oxford University Press. 441-475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199296064.013.0014.
  29. Hill, Enid (1998). Al-Sanhuri and Islamic Law: The Place and Significance of Islamic Law in the Life and Work of Abd al-Razzaq Ahmad al-Sanhuri, Egyptian Jurist and Scholar, 1895-1971. Arab Law Quarterly. 3(1). 33-64.
  30. Hoecke, Mark Van (2014). Legal Culture and Legal Transplants, Law, Society and Community: Socio-Legal Essays in Honour of Roger Cotterrell. Edited by Nobles & Schiff. Ashgate Publishing. 273-291.
  31. Husa, Jaakko (2015). A New Introduction to Comparative Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
  32. Jafari Tabar, Hassan (2004). Philosophical Foundations of Legal Interpretation. Tehran: Publishing Company (In Persian).
  33. Kahn-Freund, Otto (1974). On Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law. The Modern Law Review. 37. 1-27.
  34. Kanda, Hideki, Milhaupt, Curtis J. (2003). Re-examining Legal Transplants: The Director’s Fiduciary Duty in Japanese Corporate Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 51(4). 887-901. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3649132.
  35. Katouzian, Nasser (2004). Civil Law in the Current Legal Order. 9th Tehran: Mizan Publication (In Persian).
  36. Katouzian, Nasser (2017). Civil Law: Non-contractual Obligations. Volume 1. Tehran: Tehran University Press (In Persian).
  37. Katouzian, Nasser (2015). Developments of the Legal System after the Islamic Revolution. A Step towards Justice, volume 1. 2nd Tehran: Mizan. Publication, 785-795 (In Persian).
  38. Katouzian, Nasser (2016). The Inherent Importance of Law and Legislative Techniques. A step towards Justice, volume 2. 2nd Tehran: Mizan Publication. 317-347 (In Persian).
  39. Katouzian, Nasser (2018). Civil Liability (Non-contractual Obligations). More Eloquent than Treaties, Tehran: Ganj Danesh. 95-117 (In Persian).
  40. Kennedy, David (2003). The Methods and the Politics. Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Edited by Legrand & Munday. Cambridge University Press. 345-433.
  41. Kischel, Uwe (2019). Comparative Law. Translated by Andrew Hammel. Croydon: Oxford University Press.
  42. Kviatek, Beata (2015). Explaining Legal Transplants: Transplantation of EU Law into Central Eastern Europe, Wolf Legal Publishers.
  43. Malumián, Nicolás (2009). Trust in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.
  44. Mancuso, Salvatore (2009). Legal Transplants and Economic Development: Civil Law Vs. Common Law?. One Country, Two Systems, Three Legal Orders - Perspectives of Evolution. Edited by Oliveira & Cardinal. Berlin: 75-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68572-2_3 .
  45. Mattei, Ugo (1994). Why the Wind Changed: Intellectual Leadership in Western Law. American Journal of Comparative Law. 42(1). 195–218.
  46. Mattei, Ugo (1997). Three Patterns of Law: Taxonomy and Change in the World's Legal Systems. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 45(1). 5-44.
  47. Michaels, Ralf (2013). One Size Can Fit All – Some Heretical Thoughts on the Mass Production of Legal Transplants. In Order from Transfer: Comparative Constitutional Design and Legal Culture. Edited by Frankenberg, Günter. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 56-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781952115.00010.
  48. Miller, Jonathan M. (2003). A Typology of Legal Transplants: Using Sociology, Legal History and Argentine Examples to Explain the Transplant Process. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 51(4). 839-885. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3649131.
  49. Nelken, David (2001). Towards a Sociology of Legal Adaption. In Adapting Legal Cultures. Edited by Nelken & Feest. Hart Publishing.7-54.
  50. Nelken, David (2002). Legal Transplants and Beyond: of Disciplines and Metaphors. In Comparative Law in the 21st Century. Edited by Harding & Örücü. The Hague: Kluwer. 19-34.
  51. Nelken, David (2007). Comparative Law and Comparative Legal Studies. In Comparative Law: A Handbook. Edited by Örücü & Nelken. Portland: Hart. 3-42.
  52. Örücü, Esin (2002). Law as Transposition. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 51(2). 205-223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/iclq/51.2.205.
  53. Örücü, Esin (2004). The Enigma of Comparative Law: Variations on a Theme for the Twenty-first Century. Dorderecht: Springer Science and Business Media.
  54. Örücü, Esin (2007). A General View of Legal Families and of Mixing Systems. In Comparative Law a Handbook. Edited by Örücü & Nelken, Portland: Hart. 169-188.
  55. Peerenboom, Randall (2006). What Have We Learned About Law and Development? Describing, Predicting, and Assessing Legal Reforms in China. Michigan Journal of International Law. 27(3). 834-835.
  56. Pistor, Katharina (2002). The Standardization of Law and Its Effect on Developing Economies, The American Journal of Comparative Law. 50(1). 97-130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/840831 .
  57. Ripert, Georges, (2017), Les forces créatrices du droit, Traduit par Reza Shokohizadeh. Téhéran : Majd Publication (In Persian).
  58. Sadeghi Neshat, Amir (2015). E-commerce law. Tehran: Jungle (in Persian).
  59. Sagaert, Vincent (2012). The Trust book in the DCFR: A Civil Lawyers' Perspective. In The Future of European Property Law, edited by Erp et al, Munich: Sellier European Law Publishers. 31-46.
  60. Sanei, Parviz (1968). Laws and Society: The Relationship between Law and Social and Psychological Factors. Volume 1. Tehran: Tehran University Press (In Persian).
  61. Schlesinger, Rudolf, et al. (2009). Schlesinger's Comparative Law: Cases, Text, Materials. 7th New York: Foundation Press.
  62. Siems, Mathias (2018). Comparative Law (Law in Context). 2nd Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  63. Smits, Jan M. (2002). On Successful Legal Transplants in a Future Ius Commune Europaeum. In Comparative Law in the 21st Century, Edited by Harding & Örücü. The Hague: Kluwer. 137-154.
  64. Smits, Jan M. (2012). Coherence and Fragmentation in the Law of Contracts. In Coherence and Fragmentation in European Private Law. Edited by Letto-Vanamo & Smits. Munich. Sellier European Law Publisher. 9-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783866539655.9
  65. Stephen, Frank H. (2018). Law and Development: An Institutional Critique, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  66. Taylor, Simon (2011). The European Union and National Legal Languages: an Awkward Partnership?. Revue française de linguistique appliquée. 16. 105-118.
  67. Teubner, Gunther (1998), Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Differences. The Modern Law Review. 61(1). 11-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.00125
  68. Twining, William (2009). General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  69. Valcke, Catherine (2018). Comparing Law: Comparative Law as Reconstruction of Collective Commitments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  70. Viven-Wilksch, Jessica (2019). How Long Is Too Long to Determine the Success of a Legal Transplant? International Doctrines and Contract Law in Oceania. In Legal Transplants in East Asia and Oceania. Edited by Breda, Vito. Cambridge University Press. 132-157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108605991.007 .
  71. Voermans, Wim (2011). Styles of Legislation and Their Effects. Statute Law Review. 32(1). 38–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmq013 .
  72. Watson, Alan (1993). Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law. 2nd Athens: The University of Georgia Press.
  73. Wintgens, Luc J. (2013). The Rational Legislator Revisited. Bounded Rationality and Legisprudence. The Rationality and Justification of Legislation: Essays in Legisprudence. Edited by Wintgens & Oliver-Lalana. Switzerland: Springer. 1-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00062-6_1 .
  74. Zweigert, Konrad, Kotz, Hein (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law. Translated by Weir. 3rd edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی

مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده
انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 01 تیر 1404

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار