The Gazette 1976

SEPTEMBER 1976

GAZETTE

between two or more universities or other institutions. Another arrangement would pinpoint study and research themes which were being worked on jointly by several institutions and which led to symposia or seminars being organised in each of the participating institutions in turn. 5. The Committee wished to stress the importance of research in the field of comparative law. Members of the Committee described the various research institutes which existed in their countries. It was essential that the activity reports of these institutes and centres should be circulated among the various bodies. The Committee was very much in favour of develop- ing research centres in each of the member States, provided that such expansion did not result in over- lapping. In States where national research institutes did not exist it seemed desirable to encourage the setting-up of such institutes. Having institutes or centres to co-ordinate activities in certain member States seemed a solution worth adopting on a larger scale. A flow of information between the various centres in one and the same State allowed for a maximum of research with a minimum of means. The international exchange of information between the various national bodies should also be stepped up. To enab le foreign research workers to pursue their researches at another country's centre, the present scholarship systems should be expanded so that increased funds could be made available to a larger number of research workers. Work in international teams seemed to hold out promising prospects. C. Law Reform The Commission agreed that an opportunity should be created for the discussion within the framework of the Council of Europe (as distinct from the narrower ambit of the EEC) of : (a) the possibility of forming a group to consider the problems which should naturally go to a body of the nature of a European Law Commission; and (b) the practical steps necessary for the formation and maintenance of such a group. The Commission did not wish to formulate concrete proposals as it was not the correct body for this purpose, but does wish to put forward the idea for consideration and development by the appropriate persons and bodies. It was thought that the suitable composition of such an assembly might consist of persons experienced in comparative law and persons experienced in related disciplines. It was thought essential that such discussion should involve the representatives of the relevant governments. It was thought that, without in any way pre-empting the discussions, the proposed working group might consist of a small number of experienced comparative lawyers, who would have the advice of persons experi- enced in national law and in related disciplines. Two rather different proposals which commended themselves to the Commission were the possibility of restatements of parts of the law and secondly the pro- duction of precisely-drafted model laws on more specific topics. It was thought that the first restatements might be concerned with the law of contracts and other obligations. It was not intended that either of these activities should result in binding obligations as the activities were intended as catalysts for the historical process of unification of law where that was both practical and useful. 155

no single method existed and that methods could vary according to the problems involved. It was necessary to employ the method or methods which appeared the most suitable in each individual case. The Committee attached particular importance to the functional types of approach and to taking sociological factors into consideration. It was noted that Common Law jurists and lawyers trained in Continental law had a tendency to approach problems in aw ay that was perhaps different, but it also became apparent that this did not constitute any basic difference. Indeed, it had been observed of late that there was a trend in the Common Law countries towards the adoption of legislative texts, whereas in the countries where written law prevailed, the existence of legal texts that were often old and no longer con- sonant with the established facts of modern life, made it necessary to adopt the most liberal case law solutions. 3. The Committee was obviously concerned by linguistic impediments. It considered that they should be overcome. The view was expressed that teaching of a theoretical nature on foreign law should be accompanied by in- struction in the legal terminology applicable to each of those legal systems. Such teaching should be extended wherever it existed and introduced where it did not. Teaching should be adapted to the needs of the theor- etical instruction it was designed to support. If a student had acquired a good knowledge of a foreign legal terminology, that would moreover enable him to receive teaching in foreign law provided by a teacher who was a national of the State using the relevant legal system, and who would be able to express himself in his own language. The Committee discussed the problem of dictionaries and approved of the work that had already been done in this field. It thought that the continued production of bilingual dictionaries would be useful so long as it was clear that such dictionaries should be of an in- stitutional nature and should not confine themselves to single legal words in isolation. 4. The Committee studied the problems of teaching within the field allotted to it, i.e. specialised teaching. Committee members thought that several types of specialised teaching could be distinguished. For example, a distinction could be made between the teaching of a given system to foreign students by a teacher who was himself a foreigner and the teaching of foreign students by a teacher who was a national of the State which used the system in question. It was also clear that specialised teaching could be provided not only for students at a given level of study (notably postgraduates) but also for people who were already working, in which case it would form part of a system of permanent education. Using teachers to teach the law of their own country in foreign universities seemed an excellent idea. The Committee expressed the wish that the mobility of teachers should be ensured as effectively as possible. It was desirable that States should remove any ob- stacles to such mobility, in particular by relaxing or removing any administrative or tax restrictions. The Committee thought that young research workers should benefit from the same uniformly advantageous arrange- ments, and using lecturers and lectors with a knowledge both of law and of languages seemed particularly desirable. From among the various ways of developing the teaching of comparative law the Committee singled out a number of solutions which could be adopted. One answer was to have twinning arrangements