CONTRACT LAW, DISPUTE RESOLUTION, AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEGAL ENGLISH IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PRACTICES
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15665914
Keywords:
Contract law, dispute resolution, legal systems, Anglo – Saxon law, Romano – Germanic law, legal English, international business, arbitration, legal compliance, business practices, Cross- border transactions, judicial precedents, risk mitigation, contract drafting, employee training.Abstract
This comprehensive analysis explores the impact of different legal systems-
specifically Anglo- Saxon (Common law) and Romano – Germanic (Civil law)
frameworks on international business practices. It highlights the challenges and
opportunities presented by these legal variances in contract law and dispute
resolution. The research underscores the significance of legal English as a crucial
tool for navigating these differences, facilitating clearer communication in
international transactions. Key issues addressed include the adaptability of contract
terms, the role of judicial precedents, and the complexities of arbitration. Ultimately,
the study advocates for proactive strategies, such as employee training and
standardized documentation, to mitigate legal risks and enhance business operations
in a globalized economy
References
Hadley v. Baxendale, 9 Exch. 341(1854). 2. Donoghue v. Stevenson, (1932) UKHL100. 3. German Civil Code (BGB), enacted in 1900, * Bundesgesetzblatt*, 1900, Part 1, p.195. 4. Jhering, R. von. * The Struggle for Law* Translated by John M. Zane. New
York: The Macmillan Company, 1915. pp. 100-120. 5. Nibur, H. * Legal Theory and Social Practices*. Berlin: Springer, 1990.pp. 45- 67. 6. Oxford University Law Faculty * Legal Systems and International
Business*. Accessed April 2025. [https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/legal-
ystems-international- business](https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/legal- systems-international-business). 7. INCOTERMS 2020. International Chamber of Commerce, 2020. pp. 5-20. 8. UNIDROIT. * Principles of International Commercial Contracts* Rome:
International Institute for the Unification of Private Law, 2016. pp. 15-35