Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law
Reference:

Khalabudenko O.A. Some Issues of Comparative Law Methodology — from Functionalism to Construction and Deconstruction

Abstract: The paper presents the author’s vision of the ways to resolve the complex of philosophical and methodological problems in comparative law. The author points out the possibility of applying the legal constructivism method for determining the subject sphere of comparison. The author proves that the externalized result of applying the functional structural method is possible only at the level of the comparable legal reality. The relevant concept (“construction”), according to the author’s opinion, should be able to be expressed in the objective form; it should be characterized by certainty and autonomy among other legal phenomena. The paper covers the author’s point of view on the use of the construction on three levels of dimension: theoretical, normative and substantial. The implicit properties of the construction specific to each level of dimension can resolve the problems, arising at the implementation of the Comparative Law issues. The application of the method of deconstruction allows solving a number of methodological issues, related to the application of metaphysical conceptual categories of the legal science, which stresses the effectiveness of the method of constructivism for Comparative Law.


Keywords:

Comparative Law, methodology of Comparative Law, legal culture, legal tradition, legal construction, constructivism, deconstruction, functionalism, structure.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Avtonomova N.S. Filosofskii yazyk Zhaka Derrida. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), 2011.
2. Alekseev S.S. Izbrannoe. M.: «Statut», 2003.
3. Alekseev S.S. Pravo na poroge novogo tysyacheletiya: nekotorye tendentsii mirovogo pravovogo razvitiya — na-dezhda i drama sovremennoi epokhi. M.: Statut, 2000.
4. Afonasin E.V., Didikin A.B. Filosofiya prava: ucheb. posobie. Novosibirsk, 2006.
5. Gasparyan D.E. Vvedenie v neklassicheskuyu filosofiyu/ D.E. Gasparyan. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklo-pediya (ROSSPEN), 2011.
6. Dekomb V. Sovremennaya frantsuzskaya filosofiya: [Sbornik] / Per. s frants. M.: Izd-vo «Ves' mir», 2000.
7. Dennis Lloid. Ideya prava / perevod s angliiskogo M.A. Yumasheva, Yu.M. Yumasheva; nauch. red. Yu.M. Yumashev. 5-e. izd. M.: «KNIGODEL», 2009.
8. Dozhdev D.V. Sravnitel'noe pravo: sostoyanie i perspektivy // Rossiiskii ezhegodnik sravnitel'nogo prava, 2007 / pod red. D.V. Dozhdeva. SPb., 2008. S. 7-28.
9. Iering f. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika / Izbrannye trudy: v 2 t. T. II. SPb.: Izd-vo R. Aslanova «Yuridicheskii tsentr Press», 2006.
10. Merezhko A.A. Nauka mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava: istoriya i sovremennost'. Kiev: Takson, 2006.
11. Oborotov Yu.M. Tradits³¿ ta novats³¿ u pravovomu rozvitku: monograf³ya. Odesa: Yuridichna literatura, 2001.
12. Poldnikov D.Yu. Dogovornye teorii glossatorov. M.: Academia, 2008.
13. Postklassicheskaya teoriya prava: monografiya / I.L. Chestnov. SPb.: Izdatel'skii Dom «Alef-Press», 2012.
14. Tarasov N.N. Metodologicheskie problemy yuridicheskoi nauki. Izd-vo Gumanitarnogo universiteta, Ekate-rinburg, 2001.
15. Tkachenko A.V. Funktsionalistkaya paradigma sravnitel'no-pravovykh issledovanii: avtoref. dis… kand. yurid. nauk. Kiev, 2011.
16. Khalabudenko O.A. K voprosu stanovleniya ponyatiya «yuridicheskaya konstruktsiya» // Zakon i zhizn'. ¹ 10 (228), 2010. S. 15-23.
17. Khalabudenko O.A. Porivnyal'ne pravoznavstvo: funktsi, struktura, konstruktsiya // Naukovo-praktichnii fakhovii zhurnal «Porivnyal'ne pravoznavstvo». ¹ 1-2/2012. S. 115-124.
18. Kharitonova O.²., Kharitonov ª.O. Por³vnyal'ne pravo ªvropi: Osnovi por³vnyal'nogo pravoznavstva. ªvropei-s'k³ tradits³¿. Kh.: «Odissei», 2002.
19. Tsvaigert K., Ketts Kh. Vvedenie v sravnitel'noe pravovedenie v sfere chastogo prava: v 2 t. T. I. Osnovy: Per. s nem. M.: Mezhdunar. otnosheniya, 2000.
20. Tsimmermann Reinkhard. Rimskoe pravo i Evropeiskaya kul'tura // Vestnik Grazhdanskogo prava. ¹ 4. 2007. T. 7. S. 209-238.
21. Chevychelov V.V. Yuridicheskaya konstruktsiya: Dis. na soisk. uch. st. ... kand. yurid. nauk. N.Novgorod, 2005.
22. Yudin E.G. Metodologiya nauki. Sistemnost'. Deyatel'nost'. M.: URSS, 1997.
23. Antonios Emmanuel Platsas. The Functional and the Dysfunctional in the Comparative Method of Law: Some Critical Remarks, vol 12.3 Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, (December 2008) // http://www.ejcl.org/123/art123-3.pdf>.
24. Benedicte Fauvarque-Cosson. Comparative Law and Conflict of Laws: Allies or Enemies? New Perspectives on an Old Couple // American Journal of Comparative Law. Summer 2001. P. 407-428.
25. Gunther Teubner Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergences//The Modern Law Review. N 61. 1998. P. 11-32.
26. Marcelo Neves. From the Autopoiesis to the Allopoiesis of Law// Journal of Law and Society. Volume 28, Issue 2, June 2001. P. 242–264.
27. Mathias W. Reimann. The progress and Failure of Comparative Law in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century // American Journal of Comparative Law, 50, no. 4 (2002). P. 671-700.
28. Ralf Michaels, Durham. The Functional Method of Comparative Law // https://www.law.kuleuven.be/ccle/pdf/Michaels% 20-%20Functional%20Method%20-%20edited.pdf
29. René David. Comarative Law// Encyclopædia Britannica Online // http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/ 129640/comparative-law
30. Ugo A. Mattei, Luisa Antoniolli and Andrea Rossato. Comparative Law and Economics// Università Degli Studi di Trento// http://encyclo.findlaw.com/0560book.pdf
31. Watson A. Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law. 2 nd ed. Athens; Georgia, 2001