Over the past decades, the field commonly known as comparative law has significantly expanded. The multiplication of journals, the proliferation of scholarship and the creation of courses or summer schools specifically devoted to comparative law attest to its increasing popularity. Within the Western legal tradition, a traditional, black-letter approach to law has proved particularly authoritative. This co-authored book rethinks comparative law’s mainstream model by providing both students and lawyers with the intellectual equipment allowing them to approach any foreign law in a more meaningful way.

This book brings a new generation of comparative lawyers together to reflect on the character of their discipline.

General principles of law have made, and are likely further to make, a significant contribution to our understanding of the constituent elements of global justice. Dealing extensively with global headline issues of peace, security and justice, this book explores justice arising in specific areas of international law, as well as underlying theories of justice from political science and international relations. With contributions from leading academics and practitioners, the book adopts an interdisciplinary approach. Covering issues such as international humanitarian law, and examining the significance of non-state actors for the development of international law, the collection concludes with the complex question of how best to rethink aspects of international justice. The lessons derived from this research will have wide implications for both developed and emerging nation-states in rethinking sensitive issues of international law and justice. As such, this book will be of interest to academics and practitioners interested in international law, environmental law, human rights, ethics, international relations and political theory.

‘Rethinking’ legal reasoning seems a bold aim given the large amount of literature devoted to this topic. In this thought-provoking book, Geoffrey Samuel proposes a different way of approaching legal reasoning by examining the topic through the context of legal knowledge (epistemology). What is it to have knowledge of legal reasoning?

Presenting a critique of conventional methods in comparative law, this book argues that, for comparative law to qualify as a discipline, comparatists must reflect on how and why they make comparisons. Günter Frankenberg discusses not only methods and theories, but also the ethical implications and the politics of comparative law in bringing out the different dimensions of the discipline. Comparative Law as Critique offers various approaches that turn against the academic discourse of comparative law, including analysis of a widespread spirit of innocence in terms of method, and critique of human rights narratives. It also examines how courts negotiate differences between cases regarding Muslim veiling. The incisive critiques and comparisons in this book will be of essential reading for comparatists working in legal education and research, as well as students of comparative law and scholars in comparative anthropology and social sciences.

Now in its second edition, this textbook presents a critical rethinking of the study of comparative law and legal theory in a globalising world, and proposes an alternative model. It highlights the inadequacies of current Western theoretical approaches in comparative law, international law, legal theory and jurisprudence, especially for studying Asian and African laws, arguing that they are too parochial and eurocentric to meet global challenges. Menski argues for combining modern natural law theories with positivist and socio-legal traditions, building an interactive, triangular concept of legal pluralism. Advocated as the fourth major approach to legal theory, this model is applied in analysing the historical and conceptual development of Hindu law, Muslim law, African laws and Chinese law.

A critical analysis of Israel's control of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, advocating a normative and functional approach.

This book provides a powerful new theoretical framework for understanding cross-national cultural differences. Researchers from France and America present eight comparative case studies to demonstrate how the people of these two different cultures mobilize national "repertoires of evaluation" to make judgments about politics, economics, morals and aesthetics. This approach goes beyond essentialist models of national character to compare varying attitudes on topics ranging from racism and sexual harrassment to identity politics, publishing, journalism, the arts and the environment. The book will appeal to sociologists, political scientists and anthropologists alike.

Written by a former dean, this book offers a unique understanding of challenges facing legal education, research, publishing and governance.

Rethinking Legal Scholarship bridges the gap between American and European legal scholarship by looking at underlying methodological challenges.