Search

Important role in the improvement of medical care and the implementation of measures concerning health care belongs to the legal regulation of relations in this area, the law in particular. Despite the large number of different acts, the law of Ukraine on health is still not systematic. Today, legal provisions are scattered in different legal acts, which makes them difficult to apply in practice, reducing their effectiveness. Therefore, one of the most important issues of its organization is its systematization that is, resuming all the legal acts (or elements) in to one integral complex. It is also important to try to combine related legal rules in a single event that would systematically and comprehensively regulate the relations in this field. The author justifies the need for codification of legal acts in force in this area, and in particular the drafting and adoption of the Health Code and Sanitary Code of Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If one looks at the beginning of the Austrian ABGB, one finds a so-called "Einleitung", ie. introduction, first. Those introductions are the expression of a conflict about judicial policy starting to gain momentum in the second half of the 18th century and dominating relations between the monarchic legislator and the judiciary until the second half of the 19th century. Beneath the change towards a codified law since the late 18th century is the demand of the state to from now on create the law on its own. The judiciary was allocated the mere role of a purely norm-applying instance. In this article, it is shown which conflicts between politics and judiciary resulted from this view and how the state tried to discipline the judiciary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The functional usefulness and need of drafting manuals as a method of harmonization of drafting conventions at the national level has often been linked to the civil versus common law legal traditions. This article places the balance between the virtue of homogeneity of style of national laws (and thus certainty in the law) and dynamism of drafting conventions as legal norms (and hence modernization and approachability) beyond the civil versus common law divide. If drafting is a discipline of law, then it is a form of phronesis. And the series of subjective choices of appropriateness made by the drafters in the course of their work can only be assisted by compilations of drafting conventions that set the foundations of quality in legislation in a theoretical/principled, rather than prescribed, manner. Thus the future of manuals lies in their nature as compilations of principles of legisprudence and not in their regrettable past as a series of commands on techniques and technicalities. This may serve efficacy which is the ultimate goal of legislation as a tool for regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the element of simplification of legislation or the reduction of the volume of legislation. Particular focus is given to the techniques of consolidation and codification as means to reduce volume. Other options such as linking the process of electronic drafting, enactment, consolidation and fast tracking procedures for codification seems to be promising. It introduces the European Union (EU) simplification policies and takes a comparative view on consolidation and codification.

This paper argues that at the heart of the failure to codify the law in England lies a series of ideological misconceptions associating codification with the Napoleonic era, together with the fear that codification will consequently herald the death toll of the commom law. The author examines whether these misconceptions and fear are well founded and proposes as a way forward out of this impasse the adoption of a functional in place of an ideological approach to codification with the focus being put on the functions a code is expected to fulfil. In this respect the author reviews the various forms that codification has taken today and historically and suggests what might be a practical way towards bridging the gap, in England, between what was in 1965 a politically stated objective and the lack of progress, since that time, in carrying any codification project through to a successful conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]