Epistemology and Comparative Law: Contributions from the Sciences and Social Sciences

Epistemology and Methodology of Comparative Law

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 35-78

  Samuel, Geoffrey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85186273879     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (57)

1. B De Witte, ‘The Convergence Debate’, (1996) 3 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 105.
2. P Legrand, ‘Comparative Legal Studies and Commitment to Theory’, (1995) 58 Modern Law Review 262.
3. J-M Berthelot, ‘Programmes, paradigmes, disciplines: pluralité et unité des sciences sociales’, in J-M Berthelot (ed), Épistémologie des sciences sociales (Presses Universitaires de France, 2001), 457, 550
4. C Atias, Épistémologie juridique (Presses Universitaires de France, 1985);
5. Épistémologie du droit (Presses Universitaires de France, 1994).
6. P Legrand, Le droit comparé (Presses Universitaires de France, 1999).
7. R Susskind, Expert Systems in Law (Oxford University Press, 1987), pp 78-9.
8. G Samuel, ‘Comparative Law and Jurisprudence’, (1998) 47 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 817.
9. P Legrand, ‘European Legal Systems are not Converging’, (1996) 45 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 52, 60-1.
10. J Bell, French Legal Cultures (Butterworths, 2001), pp 1-24.
11. B Markesinis, ‘Comparative Law-A Subject in Search of an Audience’, (1990) 53 Modern Law Review 1.
12. G Samuel, The Foundations of Legal Reasoning (Antuerp, Maklu, 1994), pp 149-51;
13. G Samuel, Epistemology and Legal Method (Aldershot, Ashgate, 2003), pp 318-29.
14. R Ogien, ‘Philosophie des sciences sociales’, in Berthelot, Épistémologie, pp 521-75.
15. G-G Granger, La science et les sciences 2nd ed, (Presses Universitaires de France, 1995), p 70.
16. J-M Berthelot, Les vertus de l’incertitude (Presses Universitaires de France, 1996), p 73.
17. G Samuel, Sourcebook on Obligations and Legal Remedies 2nd ed (London, Cavendish, 2000), pp 169-77.
18. K Zweigert & H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law 3rd ed (Oxford, OUP, 1998; trans T Weir), p 34.
19. L Soler, Introduction à l’épistémologie (Paris, Ellipses, 2000), pp 74-88.
20. J Revel, ‘Les sciences historiques, in Berthelot’, Épistémologie, pp 44-52.
21. P Dubouchet, Sémiotique juridique: introduction à une science du droit (Presses Universitaires de France, 1990), pp 144-5.
22. T Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, 1970) 2nd ed.
23. J Portalis, Discours préliminaire (1799).
24. F Lawson, Negligence in the Civil Law (Oxford University Press, 1950), pp 21-22.
25. R Blanché, La science actuelle et le rationalisme 2nd ed (Presses Universitaires de France, 1973), p 54.
26. A Wijffels, ‘European Private Law: A New Software-Package for an Outdated Operating System?', in M Van Hoecke & F Ost (eds), The Harmonisation of European Private Law (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2000), pp 101-16.
27. M Villey, La formation de la pensée juridique moderne 4th ed (Montchrestien, 1975), p 538.
28. G-G Granger, Essai d’une philosophie du style (Odile Jacob, 1988), p 117.
29. J-L Bergel, Méthodologie juridique (Presses Universitaires de France, 2001), pp 362-4.
30. D Durand, La systémique 5th ed (Presses Universitaires de France, 1992), p 52.
31. J-L Bergel, Théorie générale du droit 3rd ed (Paris, Dalloz, 1999), p 273.
32. F Pringsheim, ‘The Inner Relationship Between English and Roman Law’, [1935] Cambridge Law Journal 347.
33. S Strömholm, A Short History of Legal Thinking in the West (Lund, Norstedts, 1985), pp 175-91.
34. M Lobban, The Common Law and English Jurisprudence 1760-1850 (Oxford University Press, 1991), pp 9-10
35. R Cocks, Sir Henry Maine: A Study in Victorian Jurisprudence (Cambridge, 1988), pp 46-51.
36. R Boudon, Les méthodes en sociologie 10th ed (Presses Universitaires de France, 1995), pp 125-6.
37. J-M Berthelot, ‘Les sciences du social, in Berthelot’, Épistémologie, p 247.
38. B Tierney, The Idea of natural Rights (Scholars Press for Emory University, 1997), pp 13-42.
39. G Samuel, Law of Obligations and Legal Remedies 2nd ed (Cavendish, 2001), pp 165-8.
40. P Legrand, ‘The Impossibility of “Legal Transplants” ', (1997) 4 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 111.
41. P Legrand, ‘How to Compare Now’, (1996) 16 Legal Studies 232, 236.
42. J-P Astolfi & M Develay, La didactique des sciences 4th ed (Presses Universitaires de France, 1996), p 25.
43. J Piaget, Le structuralisme 11th ed (Presses Universitaires de France, 1996), pp 63-81.
44. G Samuel, ‘Classification of Obligations and the Impact of Constructivist Epistemologies’, (1997) 17 Legal Studies 448.
45. J-M Carbasse, Introduction historique au droit (Presses Universitaires de France, 1998), pp 160-1.
46. A Watson, ‘The Importance of “Nutshells” ', (1994) 42 American Journal of Comparative Law 1.
47. P Stein, The Character and Influence of the Roman Civil Law (London, Hambledon, 1988), pp 73-82.
48. G Samuel, ‘Roman Law and Modern Capitalism’, (1984) 4 Legal Studies 185;
49. G Samuel, ‘Epistemology and Legal Institutions’, [1991] International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 309.
50. G Samuel, ‘Comparative Law and the Legal Mind’, (2001) 21 Legal Studies 444.
51. D Oliver, ‘The Human Rights Act and Public Law/Private Law Divides’, [2000] European Human Rights Law Review 343.
52. SM Waddams, ‘Joanna Wagner and the Rival Opera Houses’, (2001) 117 Law Quarterly Review 431.
53. A Sériaux, Les Personnes (Presses Universitaires de France, 1992), p 70.
54. N Rouland, Introduction historique au droit (Presses Universitaires de France, 1998), p 306.
55. D Ibbetson, A Historical Introduction to the Law of Obligations (Oxford University Press, 1999), pp 294-302.
56. R Dworkin, Law’s Empire (London Fontana, 1986), pp 228-38.
57. P Legrand, ‘Against a European Civil Code’, (1997) 60 Modern Law Review 44.