Delegation as a Source of Law

The status of delegation as a strictly institutionalized source of law is controversial. In this article, we examine some instances of delegation, in order to explore their claim to be independent and strictly institutionalized sources of law. We consider primarily the instances of labour arbitration and of mediation. Our conclusion is that there is no straightforward answer in either instance to the question whether they constitute sources of law, although the claim of arbitration is strong and that of mediation is weak. We argue that the controversial character of delegation as a source of law is therefore to be expected, given its ambivalent character, and that in exploring the reasons for this ambivalence much can be learnt about the concept of a strictly institutionalized source of law.     

Sociological interpretations of legal development

This paper seeks to outline some ways in which sociological inquiry has helped to interpret general processes of legal development. It comments on a few aspects of a vast subject. Furthermore, it was commissioned in a specific context of debate: as part of an agenda of discussion of the relative merits and potential of sociological and economic analyses of law. Hence, to provide a setting for what I try to argue about the character and value of sociological interpretations of legal change, it seems appropriate to preface those arguments with some general ideas about the nature of sociological inquiries in legal contexts and about perceived contrasts between the orientation of these inquiries and what I take to be certain orientations in economic analysis of law. Accordingly this paper is in two parts. The first offers a few prefatory remarks on the character of theoretically guided sociological inquiries about law (sociology of law). The second discusses various kinds of interpretation of legal development, which have been offered from the perspectives of sociology of law.