Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law and Society

Michigan Journal of International Law

Cultural norms

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Law And Culture Of The Apology In Korean Dispute Settlement (With Japan And The United States In Mind), Ilhyung Lee Jan 2005

The Law And Culture Of The Apology In Korean Dispute Settlement (With Japan And The United States In Mind), Ilhyung Lee

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Article addresses the apology in civil dispute settlement in Korea, Japan's neighbor across the East Sea, using the U.S.-Japan comparative discussion as a helpful frame of reference. Part I provides the necessary background on the meaning of the apology and the leading commentary along the U.S.-Japan axis, beginning with the work of Wagatsuma and Rosett. Culture appears in this discussion in two regards. First, a question arises as to whether the very meaning of the apology as noted in the commentary reflects the U.S. cultural orientation, or instead has universal application. Second, some argue that cultural norms explain the …


The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act As A Threat To Global Harmony, Steven R. Salbu Jan 1999

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act As A Threat To Global Harmony, Steven R. Salbu

Michigan Journal of International Law

Focusing primarily on the pragmatic and moral perils of cultural imperialism, I also alluded very briefly to a "political peril" that arises from the FCPA. This peril consists of the added risk of cross-national hostility that is attributable to officious and overreaching legislation across national borders. This article will examine the political hazard in greater detail, explaining why the proliferation of FCPA-style legislation unjustifiably increases the threat to global harmony.


Cultural Neutrality: A Prerequisite To Arbitral Justice, Giorgio Bernini Jan 1989

Cultural Neutrality: A Prerequisite To Arbitral Justice, Giorgio Bernini

Michigan Journal of International Law

In common parlance, neutrality is often equated with impartiality. Any such assimilation, however, would be incorrect, since neutrality and impartiality are intrinsically different. At the risk of oversimplification, neutrality may be defined as an objective status, i.e. the likelihood that the arbitrator will be, and remain, wholly equidistant in thought and action throughout the arbitral proceedings. Impartiality, on the contrary, partakes more of a subjective status, to be tested in the context of the concrete relations existing between the arbitrator(s) and each individual party. It follows that one can be impartial without being neutral; and conversely, that no arbitrator may …