Author: PRASANNASRI26092001

THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN PROMOTING UNIFORMITY IN LEGAL SYSTEMS

AUTHOR – RANA ADITYA PRATAP SINGH, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – RANA ADITYA PRATAP SINGH, THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN PROMOTING UNIFORMITY IN LEGAL SYSTEMS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 175-181, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/HIJK2080

ABSTRACT

Comparative law serves as a fundamental tool in promoting uniformity and harmonization across diverse legal systems worldwide. This research paper examines the critical role of comparative law in facilitating legal convergence while respecting cultural and jurisdictional differences. The study explores how comparative legal analysis enables lawmakers, judges, and legal scholars to identify common principles, adopt best practices, and develop model laws that transcend national boundaries. Through systematic examination of different legal traditions and methodologies, comparative law contributes to the standardization of international legal frameworks, particularly in areas such as commercial law, intellectual property, human rights, and international trade. The paper discusses the mechanisms through which comparative law promotes uniformity, including legal transplantation, harmonization initiatives by international organizations, and judicial cross-referencing. It also addresses the challenges inherent in achieving legal uniformity, such as cultural resistance, differences in legal traditions, and national sovereignty concerns. The research concludes that while complete uniformity may neither be achievable nor desirable, comparative law provides essential tools for creating compatible legal systems that facilitate international cooperation, economic integration, and the protection of fundamental rights across borders.

CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: AN OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION?

AUTHOR – LEKSHMI KRISHNA, ATHIRARAJ & PRAVEEN KUMAR S

STUDENTS AT CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TAMILNADU

BEST CITATION – LEKSHMI KRISHNA, ATHIRARAJ & PRAVEEN KUMAR S, CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA: AN OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION?, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 170-174, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

Corporate criminal liability has become an essential element in modern legal systems, as corporations increasingly exert influence in economic, social and political spheres. In India, the Companies Act, 2013 provides a detailed framework for determining criminal liability for corporate actions. It provides legal liability for violations of law such as fraud, wrongful termination and non-compliance by corporate entities and their officers. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) has now been enacted. It amends the Indian Penal Code, 1860, raising new questions – how corporations are included in the general criminal law. This paper examines the jurisdictional overlap when transferring corporate criminal conduct using the Companies Act and the BNS. Through a doctrinal analysis, the conceptual foundations of corporate liability, several legal frameworks, their specific possibilities, and similar trends from the UK and the USA are also examined.  “The confusion between specific laws and general laws, competition, integration, and duplication exist. This calls for harmonization of enforcement and liability principles, as well as ensuring legal justice and corporate responsibility.”

Keywords: Corporate Criminal Liability, Companies Act, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Overlapping Jurisdiction, Corporate.

INDIAN COURTS CANNOT APPOINT ARBITRATORS IN FOREIGN-SEATED ARBITRATION: A COMMENTARY ON THE 2025 SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT

AUTHOR – DR.VANDITA CHAHAR, ASST.PROFESSOR AT JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – DR.VANDITA CHAHAR, INDIAN COURTS CANNOT APPOINT ARBITRATORS IN FOREIGN-SEATED ARBITRATION: A COMMENTARY ON THE 2025 SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 163-169, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Case Title:
Balaji Steel Trade v. Fludor Benin S.A. & Ors.

Judges: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha & Justice Atul S. Chandurkar

Date:21 November 2025

Citation: 2025 INSC 1342

Court: Supreme Court of India

Introduction

In this case, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the constitution of an arbitral tribunal in India. The petitioner, Balaji Steel Trade, had entered into a Buyer-Seller Agreement (BSA) with Fludor Benin S.A. The BSA and its addendum provided that arbitration would take place in Benin and that Benin law would govern disputes. Subsequent contracts (Sales Contracts and High Sea Sale Agreements) were held to be ancillary and not capable of altering the main dispute-resolution clause in the BSA. The Court reaffirmed its earlier jurisprudence (e.g., in BALCO, Mankastu, BGS SGS SOMA JV, PASL Wind Solutions) that where the parties have deliberately chosen a foreign seat and foreign curial law, Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act (which includes Section 11) does not apply, and hence Indian courts have no jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator.

THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ITS IMPRINTS ON THE INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM

AUTHOR – DON BENNY, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY NOIDA

BEST CITATION – DON BENNY, THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ITS IMPRINTS ON THE INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 152-162, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/QOSO5401

Abstract

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted in 1948, stands as one of humanity’s most profound achievements. Emerging from the devastation of World War II, it marked a global commitment to uphold dignity, equality, and justice for every individual. While the UDHR itself is not a legally binding treaty, its moral and philosophical authority has profoundly shaped modern constitutional democracies, including India. The framers of the Indian Constitution drew deeply from its principles while drafting the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. This paper explores the historical development of the UDHR, its influence on the Indian legal system, and how its ideals have been realized through judicial interpretation and legislative evolution. It further examines specific areas women’s and children’s rights, religious freedom, education, and privacy demonstrating how the UDHR continues to inform India’s constitutional conscience in a rapidly changing world.

Keywords: Human rights, UDHR, Indian Constitution, equality, privacy, women’s rights, secularism, education.

COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN SOCIAL MEDIA CONTENT CREATION

AUTHOR – SATYANSH SINHA, STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, PATNA

BEST CITATION – SATYANSH SINHA, COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN SOCIAL MEDIA CONTENT CREATION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 144-151, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Introduction

For anyone starting out in the world of online content creation, understanding copyright is one of the most important steps you can take to protect your work and avoid serious legal trouble. Think of copyright as the law that gives a creator exclusive ownership over their original artistic work—like a photograph, a piece of music, a script, or a video. The moment you film a unique video or write a post, the copyright shield automatically goes up, meaning you alone get to decide who can copy, share, or change it.

“POST-COLONIAL CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA”

AUTHOR – UTKARSH DIXIT, PURSUING LLM (IP), AMITY UNIVERSITY NOIDA

BEST CITATION – UTKARSH DIXIT, “POST-COLONIAL CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 133-142, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/DWKY2574

Abstract

This paper conducts a comparative analysis of two seminal models of constitutional unamend ability in the post-colonial world: India’s judicially crafted “Basic Structure Doctrine” and South Africa’s textually explicit constitutional supremacy. Its central research question explores how these distinct mechanisms represent analogous, yet contextually specific, responses to the threat of majoritarian authoritarianism and the erosion of transformative constitutional values. Employing a methodology of comparative constitutional analysis, the study juxtaposes the historical genesis, doctrinal development, and practical application of both systems. The key finding is that while both nations share a profound commitment to protecting foundational principles like democracy, dignity, and equality from legislative override, they diverge fundamentally in method. India’s Supreme Court developed an implicit, substantive limitation on parliamentary power through judicial innovation, creating a flexible but often contested doctrine. Conversely, South Africa’s Constitution pre-emptively established a supreme legal order with stringent procedural entrenchment, offering greater clarity but less judicial discretion. The paper concludes that both models are effective, though imperfect, guardians of transformative constitutionalism. Their comparative success hinges on their ability to balance democratic legitimacy with robust judicial protection, offering vital lessons for constitutional design in post-colonial societies navigating the tensions between majority rule and minority rights.

RULE OF LAW, SEPARATION OF POWER AND CONSTITUTIONAL SUPERMACY

AUTHOR – SEKAR V, STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH (AUUP)

BEST CITATION – SEKAR V, RULE OF LAW, SEPARATION OF POWER AND CONSTITUTIONAL SUPERMACY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 123-132, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The principles of Rule of Law, Separation of Powers, and Constitutional Supremacy form the foundational pillars of modern democratic governance. These doctrines collectively ensure that government authority is exercised within a legal framework that upholds justice, accountability, and equality. The Rule of Law signifies that no individual, including the state, is above the law, emphasizing fairness, due process, and legal certainty. The Separation of Powers, propounded by Montesquieu, divides governmental functions among the legislature, executive, and judiciary to prevent concentration of power and promote institutional balance. Meanwhile, Constitutional Supremacy ensures that all laws and governmental actions derive their validity from the Constitution, which stands as the supreme law of the land. Together, these principles safeguard individual rights, reinforce democratic values, and maintain the integrity of governance.

This research examines the interconnection among these three doctrines and their practical application in constitutional democracies, particularly within the Indian context. It highlights how the judiciary plays a vital role in maintaining equilibrium between the organs of government and ensuring that constitutional supremacy prevails. The study also explores contemporary challenges such as judicial overreach, executive dominance, and legislative inaction, which threaten the delicate balance envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. By analyzing judicial precedents, constitutional provisions, and comparative perspectives, this research aims to reaffirm the importance of these foundational principles in sustaining the rule-based democratic order.

Key Word: Rule of Law: Ensures equality and accountability before the law. Separation of Powers: Prevents abuse of authority through functional division.  Constitutional Supremacy: Establishes the Constitution as the ultimate source of legal validity.

AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON OIL SPILL AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1958

AUTHOR – ADULYANATHESHWARAN, STUDENT AT SAVEETHA SCHOOL OF LAW, SAVEETHA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL AND TECHNICAL SCIENCES (SIMATS), SAVEETHA UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – ADULYANATHESHWARAN, AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON OIL SPILL AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1958, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 96-122, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/DBZS6278

ABSTRACT :-

Oil spills are the accidental release of petroleum into the environment, often in oceans or other bodies of water. This study examines the causes, effects, and prevention of oil spills in India. Objectives: This empirical study aims to investigate the multifaceted environmental impacts of oil spills stemming from merchant shipping activities and to critically assess the effectiveness of regulatory frameworks, with a historical lens on the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, and its evolution into current Indian maritime law, in mitigating these impacts. Findings: The study reveals that despite significant advancements in maritime safety and environmental regulations since the initial enactment of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, oil spills continue to pose a substantial threat to marine and coastal ecosystems. Empirical data from various spill incidents demonstrate severe long-term damage to biodiversity, including marine flora and fauna, and significant disruption to fishing, tourism, and other marine-dependent livelihoods. Methodology: A total of 200 sample respondents in the age group of 18-50 years were collected. The effects of oil spills can be far-reaching, and can include the death of marine life, the destruction of coastal ecosystems, and the contamination of drinking water. The study makes a number of recommendations for improving the prevention and response to oil spills in India. Conclusion: Oil spills from merchant shipping represent a continuing environmental hazard with profound and often irreversible consequences. While the evolution of Indian maritime law, building upon the groundwork of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, and incorporating international standards, has significantly improved the regulatory landscape, there remains a critical need for enhanced vigilance, proactive enforcement, and continuous investment in oil spill prevention and response mechanisms.

KEY WORDS : – Oil spill, Hydrocarbon, Natural disaster, Ecosystems, Contamination

IRISH-LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN IRELAND, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND THE EUROPEAN UNION: A COMMENTARY

AUTHOR – TADGH QUILL-MANLEY,
2ND YEAR STUDENT AT KING’S INNS

BEST CITATION – TADGH QUILL-MANLEY, IRISH-LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN IRELAND, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND THE EUROPEAN UNION: A COMMENTARY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 86-95, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/EZFO6957

Abstract

This commentary examines the legal framework governing Irish-language rights in Ireland (Éire), the United Kingdom (particularly Northern Ireland), and the European Union, highlighting the persistent tension between symbolic constitutional commitments and practical enforcement. Despite Irish’s status as the first official language under Article 8 of the 1937 Irish Constitution, judicial interpretations – seen in cases like O’Monacháin v An Taoiseach [1982] IESC 10 and Peadar Ó Maicín v Ireland [2014] IESC 12 – treat it as participatory rather than structural, emphasising “reasonable efforts” (Ó Cadhla v Minister for Justice & Equality [2019] IEHC 503) amid resource constraints. Statutory measures, such as the Official Languages Act 2003 and its 2021 Amendment (fully commenced December 2024), offer incremental progress but leave court proceedings largely unaffected.

In Northern Ireland, the archaic Administration of Justice (Language) Act 1737 was repealed by the Identity and Language (Northern Ireland) Act 2022, introducing an Irish Language Commissioner and promoting bilingualism, though implementation remains uneven. Supra-nationally, the European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 6 and 14) and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages influence domestic standards, while EU law – post-2022 derogation lift via Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2264 – ensures Irish’s full official status, despite ongoing linguist recruitment challenges. Comparatively, Irish lags behind Welsh and Scottish Gaelic frameworks. Recommendations include enacting a specialised Irish Language in the Courts Act, enhancing training, and leveraging discrimination arguments under the ECHR. Ultimately, bridging symbolism and reality demands legislative clarity and investment to affirm cultural identity and democratic integrity.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS OF RESERVATION: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF RAM SINGH V. UNION OF INDIA (2015) AND THE JAT RESERVATION DEBATE IN INDIA

AUTHOR – GANESH SHRIRANG SATARKAR (NALE), DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY, CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF HARYANA, HARYANA

BEST CITATION – GANESH SHRIRANG SATARKAR (NALE), THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS OF RESERVATION: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF RAM SINGH V. UNION OF INDIA (2015) AND THE JAT RESERVATION DEBATE IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (14) OF 2025, PG. 80-85, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The Supreme Court judgment in Ram Singh v. Union of India (2015) marks a defining point in India’s reservation jurisprudence, especially regarding how “backwardness” must be constitutionally understood and empirically established for inclusion in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) list. The case involved the demand by Jat communities—spread across northern states and historically dominant—for recognition as OBCs in the Central List. Although various state commissions and political actors supported the demand, the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC), after extensive review, rejected the claim citing lack of contemporary data and the political, economic, and social dominance of Jats. Despite this, the Central Government issued a notification on 4 March 2014 granting OBC status to Jats in nine states. The Supreme Court struck down the notification, ruling that backwardness must be “social,” measurable through objective criteria, and justified by contemporaneous quantifiable data, not historical generalizations or electoral pressures.

This 3500+ word paper presents a detailed hybrid academic–commentary analysis of the judgment, incorporating facts, extracts, and reasoning from the official Supreme Court judgment PDF. It examines the constitutional framework, evolving backward class jurisprudence, the NCBC’s evidentiary standards, and the Court’s reasoning emphasizing constitutional morality, empirical rigor, and the prohibition against politically motivated inclusions. Comparative reservation movements involving Marathas, Patels, Kapus, and Gujjars further contextualize how dominant agrarian castes seek reservations amidst economic decline. The paper concludes with insights into future reservation policy, judicial scrutiny, and the role of evidence-based social justice.

Keywords: Jat Reservation, Ram Singh v. Union of India (2015), OBC, NCBC, Social Backwardness, Constitutional Morality, Indra Sawhney, Quantifiable Data, Contemporary Evidence, Reservation Policy, Dominant Agrarian Castes, Political Mobilization, Equality Jurisprudence, Affirmative Action, Expert Commission, Judicial Review.