This document discusses techniques of comparative law. It addresses major pitfalls in comparative legal analysis, such as linguistic and cultural differences between legal systems. It also examines different comparative legal methods, including Kamba's three-stage approach of description, identification, and explanation. Finally, it considers issues in comparing legal systems, such as the suitability of topics, requirements of the comparative method, and testing functionality.

1. เทคนิคการ
เปรียบเทียบกฎหมาย
ชาคริต สิทธิเวช
1

2. an introduction
ข้อควรพิจารณาในการ
เปรียบเทียบระบบศาล
ข้อควรพิจารณาเกี่ยวกับ
กฎหมายปกครอง
2

3. an introduction
3

4. Peter de Cruz, "Techniques of
comparative law", in Comparative
law in a changing world
(London, 2007), pp. 219-249.
4

5. •major pitfalls & perils
•quest for methodology
•methods
5

6. •linguistic &
terminological
problems
•cultural
differences
•objects of study
•comparability
•legal pattern
•bias
•exclusion &
ignorance
major pitfalls & perils
6

7. linguistic &
terminological
problems
7

8. cultural differences
between legal systems
8

9. arbitrary selection of
objects of study
9

10. comparability in
comparison
10

11. viability of theory of a
common legal pattern
11

12. imposition of one’s own
legal conceptions
12

13. the four ‘law jobs’
•social control
•conflict resolution
•adaptation & social change
•norm enforcement
13

14. omission of extra-legal
factors
14

15. the quest for
methodology
• general character
of comparative
law
• subject matter
• macro v micro
• suitability of
topics
• comparative
method
requirements
• test of
functionality
15

16. clarifying the general
character of
comparative law
16

17. the subject matter of
the comparison
17

18. macro-comparison &
micro-comparison
18

19. comparative method:
requirements
19

20. the test of functionality
20

21. comparative legal
methods
•Kamba’s three-stage
approach
•a blueprint
21

22. Kamba’s
three-stage-approach
22

23. •the descriptive phase
•the identification phase
•the explanatory phase
23

24. • norms
• concepts
• institutions
• socio-economic problems
• legal problems
• legal solutions
the descriptive phase
24

25. the identification phase
•differences
•similarities
25

26. the explanatory phase
•resemblances
•dissimilarities
26

27. “no one single method
applicable”
27

28. a blueprint
28

29. 1. Identify the problem.
2. Identify the foreign
jurisdiction & its parent
legal family.
3. Decide the primary
sources of law &
materials.
4. Gather & assemble the
material relevant to the
jurisdiction being
examined.
5. Organise the material.
6. Provisinally map out the
possible answers to the
problem.
7. Critically analyse the
legal principles.
8. Set out conclusions
within the comparative
framework with caveats
& with critical
commentary.
29

30. คําถาม?
30

31. ข้อควรพิจารณาในการ
เปรียบเทียบระบบศาล
31

32. • comparative law in courts
• comparative law & legislator
• comparativism & the verdict
• case law in non-common law jurisdictions
• styles of judicial decision
• overriding general principles
32

33. comparative law in
courts
33

34. •a tool of interpretation
•a tool of law reform
34

35. sovereignty
v
“uniformity of outcome”
35

36. “comparison illuminate
our understanding”
36

37. “The discipline of comparative
does not aim at a poll of
solutions adopted in different
countries. It has the different
and inestimable value of
sharpening our focus on the
weight of competing
consideration.”
37

38. functional use of foreign law
• a tool of interpretation
• to look for solutions
• to promote a change
• to fill in a gap
• to discard an unsatisfactory solution
38

39. the three phases
•discovering: what is found
•understanding: what is to
be used
•applying: how far
39

40. certain practical considerations
• language skills
• national insularity or pride: rule of proof;
common law as a whole
• pressures: time & volume of work
• budget
40

41. “[A]ll judges cannot be
expected to be
comparatists, but it is
their duty to consult
those who are in a
position to supply the
information needed ...”
41

42. “[It] cannot be right to
attempt to construe
‘acquiesced’ by
reference only to its
possible meaning at
common law or equity.”
42

43. comparative law &
legislator
43

44. •a tool of interpretation
•a tool of law reform
44

45. justification of
comparativism &
the verdict
45

46. the authority of case
law in non-common law
jurisdictions
46

47. interpreters
v
law makers
47

48. lower courts
v
superior courts
48

49. styles of judicial
decision
49

50. •English
•French
•German
•Swedish
•American
50

51. the relevance of
overriding general
principles
51

52. •aequitas
•bona fides/good faith
•good morals and public order
•custom
52

53. คําถาม?
53

54. ข้อควรพิจารณาเกี่ยวกับ
กฎหมายปกครอง
54

55. Administrative law?
The subjects?
Power allocation?
The procedure?
The instutions?
The judicial control?
Liability?
55

56. What is administrative law?
56

57. What are the subjects
of administrative law?
57

58. the allocation of
powers
58

59. administrative
procedure
59

60. institutions providing
legal redress
60

61. the judicial control of
power
61

62. liability of the
administration
62

63. conclusion
63

64. คําถาม?
64