NOTE THAT THE CALL FOR ABSTRACTS HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO MARCH 8, 2013 (SEE BELOW)
- What differences exist in the approaches to gap-filling in mixed, civilian and common law systems?
- What differences in technique exist within the mixed jurisdictions themselves, eg between codified systems and uncodified systems?
- To what extent is the borrowing of common law solutions taken to be "equity" or gap-filling? Is this considered a legitimate form of equity?
- To what extent is "equity" understood as a civilian concept? Is it fully divorced from the "Equity" of the common law?
- How are gaps defined, revealed or recognized? Is their existence a precondition of equitable activity? Is there a taxonomy of gaps?
- Is there an established procedure, a Directory Provision, a hierarchy of sources to be consulted, or is the process of gap-filling left entirely to the discretion of the judge?
- To what extent is this form of judicial activity synonymous with the production of seminal and leading cases?
- Which substantive fields of the law are particularly fertile for gap-filling?