Browsing by Subject "Legal system"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Growing tendency to harmonisation with IFRS: some evidences from Turkey
    (Inderscience Publishers, 2009) Kocakülâh, M. C.; Şimga-Muğan, C.; Hoşal-Akman, Nazli; Aldogan, M.
    Motivated by the recent developments in accounting regulations, we explore the tendency of countries to converge to IFRS for both public and private companies and present some evidence on the issue from an emerging market. We explore how the legal system – civil vs. common law – and the stock market development stage in a country affects the acceptance of IFRS by the regulators. We find that stock market influences the acceptance of IFRS for both public and private companies while the legal system affects the requirement of IFRS for the private companies. In Turkey, different regulatory bodies control different types of companies. Capital Markets Board that controls the listed companies issued the first set of translated IFRS in 2003. Established in 2002, Turkish Accounting Standards Board (TASB) is responsible to translate and issue the international accounting standards. Examination of issue and effective dates of both standards reveals that TASB closely follows the IASB efforts.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The Kelsen-Hart debate: Hart’s critique of Kelsen’s legal monism reconsidered
    (Springer, 2016) Vinx, Lars; Telman, D. A. J.
    Kelsen’s legal monism—the claim that it is impossible for legal science to recognize the existence of more than one legal system—is often held to be one of the least plausible aspects of Kelsen’s pure theory of law. This paper challenges the criticism of Kelsen’s monism in the work of H.L.A. Hart. In particular, it will argue that Hart failed to show that Kelsen’s monism rests on a mistaken criterion of the identity of legal system and that it is, therefore, descriptively inadequate. Kelsen’s monism is not only descriptively viable but potentially able to provide an interesting counterpoint to the prevalent legal pluralist orthodoxy in the theory of legal system.