David Greene ponders the benefits of adopting a less adversarial & more international approach to litigation
As I write this I am heading down to East Africa where I have worked for many years. This work has included advising on civil justice and human rights issues in jurisdictions following common law and civil law in both the French and Dutch/Roman tradition. I have also worked in the courts of many jurisdictions over the years and have had the opportunity to see both systems in operation.
While in Rwanda I am attending a conference at the Kigali International Arbitration Centre and discussing the different approaches of the common law and civil law to arbitration. Kigali is a prescient place to have the debate since it has until recently followed the civil law but, for political and other reasons, is now switching to common law.
Lawyers from the two traditions can be defensive of their own particular process for adjudicative dispute resolution. Domestically this is reflected by some judges who, while in the EU they were able to do so, have resisted on occasion the effective transfer
