Pluralism and deformalisation as mechanisms in the achievement of more equitable and just outcomes – the move from „Classical Formalism“ to deformalisation.

Ojo, Marianne (2011): Pluralism and deformalisation as mechanisms in the achievement of more equitable and just outcomes – the move from „Classical Formalism“ to deformalisation.

Abstract

By tracing the development and evolvement of certain legal theories over the centuries, as well as consequences emanating from such developments, this paper highlights how and why a shift from the model of „classical formalism“ towards more deformalised models has arisen.

The paper also illustrates how deformalisation and „a corresponding loss of certainty“ could be harnessed in order to provide for greater „realism“ and externalities, whilst still attaining a respectable level of consistency. Developments and efforts aimed at exploring the applicability of classical formalism and deformalised models should be regarded as „an endeavour to establish a consistency of terms, as well as a probing into how far principles, notions, and rules for decision making can be generalised, and rectification when generalisations have gone too far.“

Unity, as well as „a common law of mankind“ are goals which are still capable of being achieved even where fragmentation, diversification and pluralisation of the law occur. Such processes of specialisation, where correspondingly countered by the appropriate level of generality as well as the ability to apply rules – such that they are consistently applied in similar situations, are capable of achieving more equitable, just and unifying goals as opposed to a model which merely strives for the achievement of legal certainty. Looking beyond the borders of legal theory may indeed provide the much needed redress in situations where generalisations exceed the required limits.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: pluralism; ethics; fragmentation; formalisation; rules; legal certainty; legal theory; plausible constitutionalism; realism; regulation; accountability
• Subjects: K - Law and Economics > K2 - Regulation and Business Law; K - Law and Economics > K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law > K33 - International Law; G - Financial Economics > G1 - General Financial Markets > G18 - Government Policy and Regulation; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty; G - Financial Economics > G3 - Corporate Finance and Governance

References

Allen S, (Book Review by Stephen Allen, Patrick Capps), „Human Dignity and the Foundations of International Law, Leiden Journal of International Law (2010), 23: 960-966

Beck U, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (1992) London: Sage Publications

Beckett JA , „Rebel Without a Cause? Martti Koskenniemi and the Critical Legal Project“ (2006) 7 GLJ 1045

Foucault M, ‘Iran: The Spirit of a World without Spirit’, in L. Kritzman (ed.), Michel Foucault: Politics, Philosophy, Culture (1988)

Jenks CW, The Common Law of Mankind (1958)

Leiter B, „Legal Formalism and Legal Realism: What is the Issue?“ Legal Theory, 16 (2010), 111–133, Cambridge University Press 2010

Luhmann N, Ziegert K and Kastner F, Law as a Social System (2004)Oxford University Press at page 61

Martineau A, The Rhetoric Of Fragmentation: Fear and Faith in International Law, The Structure of the Fragmentation Debate: The Play Between Unity and Diversity Leiden Journal of International Law / Volume 22 Issue 01, pp 1 – 28 Published online: 04 Februar 2009

Ojo M, „Addressing the Inadequacies of Private Law in the Regulation of Contracts (During and Post Contract Formation Periods)“, July 2011

Singh S, „The Potential of International Law: Fragmentation and Ethics“ Leiden Journal of International Law, 24 (2011), pp. 23–43

Tamanaha B, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (2010)

Weber, M, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (trans. H. H. Gerth and C.Wright Mills) (1946)