Doctor of Philosophy of Comparative Private International Law of the University of Western Australia [School of Law/ Compartive Private International Law] 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evaluation of the Transplantability of the Doctrine of Proper Law of the Contract from Australian Law into the Jordanian Legal System Mohammad Rasmi Yousef Al-umari L.L.B. / L.L.M This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Comparative Private International Law of the University of Western Australia [School of Law/ Compartive Private International Law] 2020 Thesis Declaration I, [Mohammad Rasmi Yousef Al-umari], certify that: This thesis has been substantially accomplished during enrolment in this degree. This thesis does not contain material which has been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma in my name, in any university or other tertiary institution. In the future, no part of this thesis will be used in a submission in my name, for any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the prior approval of The University of Western Australia and where applicable, any partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree. This thesis does not contain any material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. This thesis does not violate or infringe any copyright, trademark, patent, or other rights whatsoever of any person. Third party editorial assistance was provided in preparation of this thesis by Scribo Proofreading & Editing. This thesis does not contain work that I have published, nor work under review for publication. Signature: Date: 31/07/2020 i This thesis has been accomplished under the supervision of Camilla Andersen Bruno Zeller Professor, Cand. Jur. (Denmark), PhD Dr, BCom BEd PhD Melb., MIL Deakin (Denmark) Professor, Faculty of Arts, Business, Law Professor, Faculty of Arts, Business, Law and Education, UWA Law School and Education, UWA Law School ii Abstract This thesis employs comparative methodology to examine the transplantability of the doctrine of proper law of contract from Australia into the Jordanian legal system, comparing the functional scope of the targeted rules in both countries. To this end, it first develops its own methodology for evaluating the legal transplant, before analysing the ability of Jordan to accommodate the proper law doctrine within its national legal system. This analysis includes a functional effectiveness of the doctrine from a Jordanian perspective; including its alignment with political and cultural values. The thesis concludes that the transplantablity of the proposed solution is not only possible, but necessary. iii Table of Contents Evaluation of the Transplantability of the Doctrine of Proper Law of the Contract from Australian Law into the Jordanian Legal System .............................. 1 Thesis Declaration ............................................................................................................ i Abstract ............................................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ................................................................................................................ vii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Point of Departure .............................................................................................. 2 1.3. Reason for the Selection of the Topic ................................................................ 6 1.4. Why the Proper Law? ........................................................................................ 7 1.5. Why Australia? .................................................................................................. 7 1.6. Research Problem .............................................................................................. 8 1.7. Research Questions ............................................................................................ 9 1.8. Research Aims ................................................................................................... 9 1.9. Issues Examined .............................................................................................. 10 1.10. Research Purpose ............................................................................................. 10 1.11. Significance ..................................................................................................... 10 1.12. Originality ........................................................................................................ 11 1.13. Contribution ..................................................................................................... 11 1.14. Scope of the Study ........................................................................................... 11 Chapter 2: Methodology ............................................................................................... 13 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 13 2.1. The Theory of Legal Transplant ...................................................................... 14 2.1.1. Who is Correct: Watson, Legrand or Kahn- Freund? ............................... 18 2.1.2. Watson’s Understanding of ‘Legal Transplant’ ........................................ 23 2.1.3. Issues with Watson’s Understanding of Legal Transplant as a Method of Comparative Law ........................................................................................ 24 2.1.4. Factors That Must Be Taken into Account When Transplanting a Legal Rule ........................................................................................................ 28 2.2. Comparative Methodology .............................................................................. 30 2.2.1. Undertaking a Comparative Study ............................................................ 30 2.2.2. Comparative Methods ............................................................................... 32 2.2.3. The Relationships between the Claimed Methods of Comparative Legal Research ................................................................................................. 35 2.3. The Researcher’s Understanding of Comparative Methodology .................... 38 2.3.1. Why the Comparative Methodology is Too Complex to Apply ............... 39 2.3.2. The Protocol of Transplanting a Legal Rule from One Country to Another ............................................................................................................ 43 2.3.3. Research Structure .................................................................................... 46 Chapter 3: Ability of the Jordanian Law to Abandon the Current Conflict of Laws Rules ..................................................................................................................... 54 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 54 3.1. Cultural and Historical Backgrounds of Articles 20 and 21 of the JCC .......... 54 3.1.1. Historical Backgrounds of Articles 20 and 21 of the JCC ........................ 55 3.1.2. Justifications for Adopting the Jordanian Conflict Rules in Question ...... 56 3.2. The Relationship Between Law and Religion in Jordan ................................. 58 iv 3.3. Consistency of the Targeted Jordanian Conflict Rules with Justifications for Adoption ............................................................................................................ 63 3.3.1. Historical Background of the Law of the Place Where the Contract Is Made ................................................................................................................ 63 3.3.2. The Close Relationship Between the Selected Connecting Factors and the Contract ...................................................................................................... 70 3.3.3. Internationality of the Law of the Place Where the Contract Is Made ...... 72 3.3.4. Flexibility of the Formula Currently Adopted by Jordan.......................... 73 3.4. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 73 Chapter 4: Comparability of the Australian and the Jordanian Conflict Rules Concerning Contracts ................................................................................................... 75 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 75 4.1. Comparative Analysis of the Scope of the General Conflict Rules Regarding Contracts in Australia and Jordan .......................................................... 75 4.1.1. Contract: Meaning in Australia and Jordan .............................................. 76 4.1.2. Unilateral Obligations Enforceable by Law in Australia and Jordan ....... 85 4.1.3. What Makes a Contract International? ...................................................... 88 4.2. National Mandatory Laws Affecting the Scope of the Conflict Rules Regarding International Contracts in