Suchergebnisse

Common Law systems have always practiced a fairly consistent comparative legal research and scholarship. Initially through the mere exportation of rules and principles from England this was a somewhat centripetal comparative law but it has passed through various modes of radial, circumferential, centrifugal and ultimately polycentric comparisons and cross-fertilizations. Nevertheless, this exercise in comparative law, also in Australia, has remained largely within the boundaries of the Common Law world. It is no longer possible for legal research to be conducted wholly within the boundaries of a single legal system, even that of the enlarged Common Law. Legal researchers need to look beyond the borders of their own jurisdictions. Hardly any legal system today is capable of operating without international interactions requiring a knowledge of foreign legal systems, and many legal problems, or socio-economic problems which law must help to solve, may find useful models elsewhere. In Australia there are needs for reform in fields such as intellectual property, banking or consumer law, and for providing qualified advice including predictions of developments in foreign legal systems to ensure that foreign commerce and trade is fully informed of potential benefits and disadvantages to be found under foreign law. Australia must also be able to take its proper place in fields such as international environmental protection, and to take advantage of potentially beneficial developments in dispute resolution techniques. All of these situations are ones in which, by looking outside their national and even Common Law framework, Australian legal researchers will be better placed to provide concrete benefits to Australian society.

This volume deals with the law governing the administrative implementation of European Union public policy. Much of this law is specific to individual policy sectors. The volume provides a study of such specialized admininstrative law for more than twenty sectors. This cross-sectoral approach allows for detailed comparisons of EU administration in diverse policy fields. It identifies situations where legal structures and approaches may be unnecessarily duplicated, thus indicating where a comprehensive, general system could be advantageous for both Union law and policy achievement. The comparative nature of the study also draws attention to policy fields which have proven to be testing grounds for approaches adopted subsequently in other areas. In addition, the work highlights the distinctive, highly networked, and strongly cooperative character of EU administration.