Issues associated with the influence of legal systems on each other and their interaction have been in the focus of legal scholars’ attention for a long time. However, there are still no answers to certain issues. Discrepancies arise even about understanding of the essence of the process and defining the object of influence, thus giving rise to the need to continue research in this area.

The purpose of the article is to explore the scope, mechanism, subject (object) of the interaction, as well as the forms and factors (conditions) of the latter.

Using the civilization method for researching legal phenomena and analyzing them from the cultural perspective, the authors argue that since a legal system is a part of culture, in the course of steady contacts of civilizations there is also an interaction of legal systems which should be reasonably called “legal acculturation”. At the same time, “legal acculturation” is understood as positive consequences of contacts between legal systems. Legal acculturation may reflect a mutual or unilateral influence of legal systems. In the first instance, we are talking about the “interaction of legal systems”. In the second one – about adaptation (accommodation) of one system to another one. When acculturation occurs with regard to legal systems of civilizations which remained in the past, it is a case of reception of law; if there is a borrowing from legal systems which coexist in time, depending on the type of acculturation it can be a case of “legal adaptation” or “interaction” (“mutual influence”) of legal systems. Legal acculturation can take place in the following forms: study of the legal system-donator; assimilation of its concept, ideas, constructs, foundations, methodology, terminology, etc; borrowing of elements of some legal systems into other ones (“legal transplantations”); borrowing of the lawmaking methodology; borrowing of the methodology for resolving disputes relating to law; direct application of the rules of law from the legal system-donator etc.

The nature of legal systems’ interaction and the type of its consequences depends on the lability of legal systems, by which we mean their ability to be the object (participants) of transformation processes occurring due to the influence of some systems on other ones, their interaction etc. In such a case the following provision should be regarded as dominant: if legal mentality is the criterion for separation of legal systems, in the same manner it (with due regard for its national, ethnic and other characteristics) can be a tool of legal acculturation. The use of this technique allows taking into account the axiological elements of the concepts of “law” and “legal system”, thus making it possible not only to correct the understanding of law, but also to ensure the possibility of determining the prospects of legal acculturation and the impact on its efficiency.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Watson A, Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law (Scottish Academic Press 1974) (in English).

2. Watson A, Evolution of Western Private Law (Expanded Edition) (Johns Hopkins University Press 2000) (in English).

3. Alekseev S, Pravo: azbuka – teorija – filosofija: opyt kompleksnogo issledovanija [Law: ABC – Theory – Philosophy: a Comprehensive Research Experience] (Statut 1999) (in Russian).

4. Diurant V, Tsezar y Khrystos [Caesar and Christ] (KRON–PRESS 1995) (in Russian).

5. Iakovets Yu, Ystoryia Tsyvylyzatsyi [History of Civilization] (VlaDar 1995) (in Russian).

6. Karbone Zh, Yurydycheskaia sotsyolohyia [Sociology of Law] (Prohress 1986) (in Russian).

7. Khantynhton S, Stolknovenye tsyvylyzatsyi [A Clash of Civilizations] (AST 2006) (in Russian). 8. Norbert Je, O processe civilizacii. Sociogeneticheskie i psihogeneticheskie issledovanija [On the Process of Civilization. Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Studies], t 1: Izmenenija v povedenii vysshego sloja mirjan v stranah Zapada [Changes in the Behavior of Laity’s Upper Layer in the West] (Universitetskaja kniga 2001) (in Russian).

9. Kharytonov Ye ta Kharytonova O, Pryvatne pravo yak kontsept: poshuk paradyhmy [Private Law as a Concept: Searching for a Paradigm] (Feniks 2014) (in Ukrainian).

10. Onishchenko N, Pravovi systemy: problemy teorii [Legal Systems: Issues of Theory] (In-t derzhavy i prava im V M Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy 2002) (in Ukrainian).

11. Osborn R, Tsyvylyzatsyia, novaia ystoryia zapadnoho myra [Civilization, the New History of the Western World] (AST; Astrel 2010) (in Russian).

12. Popper K, Vidkryte suspilstvo ta yoho vorohy [Open Society and Its Enemies], t 2 (Osnovy 1994) (in Ukrainian).

13. Shtaerman і drugie, Kultura Drevneho Ryma [The Culture of Ancient Rome], t 1 (Nauka 1982) (in Russian).

14. Strazhnyi O, Ukrainskyi mentalitet – iliuzii – mify – realnist [Ukrainian Mentality. illusions – myths – reality] (Dug i Litera 2017) (in Ukrainian).

15. Veber М, Protestantskaja jetika i duh kapitalizma. Izbrannye proizvedenija [Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism. Selected Works] (Progress 1990) (in Russian).

Edited books

16. Holubtsova E (red), Kultura Drevneho Ryma [The Culture of Ancient Rome] (Nauka 1985) (in Russian).

17. Kharytonov Ye ta Kharytonova O, ‘Doslidzhennia retseptsii rymskoho prava yak paradyhma istorychnoi komparatyvistyky’ [‘Research of the Reception of Roman Law as a Paradigm of Historical Comparative Studies’] v Kresin O ta Sytar I (red), Istoriia porivnialnoho pravoznavstva yak sfera naukovykh doslidzhen [History of Comparative Jurisprudence as a Field of Scientific Research: Collected Scientific Papers] (Liha-pres 2015) (in Ukrainian).

18. – –, ‘From Comprehension of Reception of Roman Law to a General Theory of the Interaction of Legal Systems: Raising the Issue’ in The Interaction of Legal Systems: PostSoviet Approaches (Wildy, Simmonds and Hill, Publishers 2015) 108-133 (in English).

19. – –, ‘Retseptsii rymskoho prava ta inshi fenomeny labilnosti pravovykh system’ [‘Receptions of Roman Law and Other Phenomena of Lability of Legal Systems’] v Khartonov Ye (red), Rymske pryvatne pravo: zdobutky yevropeiski ta hlobalni: materialy mizhnarodnoho kolokviumu [Roman Private Law: European and Global Achievements: Materials of the International Colloquium] (Feniks 2018) (in Ukrainian).

20. Melkov Yu, ‘Problema edynstva y mnozhestvennosty kultur v uslovyiakh hlobalyzatsyy’ [On the Unity and Plurality of Cultures in the Context of Globalization] v naukovopraktychna konferentsiia “Liudstvo na mezhi tysiacholit: dialoh tsyvilizatsii” [Scientific and Practical Conference “Humanity at the Turn of Millenniums: Dialogue of Civilizations”] (Nats akad upravlinnia 2003) (in Ukrainian). 21. Popovych M (red), Problemy teorii mentalnosti [Issues of the Mentality Theory] (Naukova Dumka 2006) (in Ukrainian).

22. Shyshkoff H (red), Fylosofskyi slovar [Philosophical Dictionary] (Respublyka 2003) (in Russian).

23. Tatsii V ta inshi, Zahalnoteoretychna ta istorychna yurysprudentsiia. Pravova doktryna Ukrainy [General Theoretical and Historical Jurisprudence. Legal Doctrine of Ukraine] (Pravo 2013) (in Ukrainian).

24. Tsvik M ta Petryshyn O (red), Pravova systema Ukrainy: istoriia, stan ta perspektyvy: Metodolohichni ta istoryko-teoretychni problemy formuvannia i rozvytku pravovoi systemy Ukrainy [Legal System of Ukraine: History, State and Prospects: Methodological, Historical and Theoretical Issues of Establishment and Development of the Legal System of Ukraine] (Pravo 2008) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

25. Kharytonov E and Kharytonova O, ‘Reception of law and law adaptation as forms of interaction of legal systems’ (2015) 12.1 Young Scientist 151-4 (in English).

26. Kharytonov Ye ta Kharytonova O, ‘Vid osmyslennia retseptsii rymskoho prava – do formuvannia zahalnoi teorii vzaiemodii pravovykh system’ [‘From the Comprehension of the Reception of Roman Law – to the Formulation of the General Theory of Legal Systems’ Interaction’] (2014) 1 Pravo Ukrainy 274-97 (in Ukrainian).

27. Mozhaikina N, ‘Vplyv hlobalizatsii na formuvannia trudovoi mentalnosti v Ukraini’ [‘The Impact of Globalization on the Establishment of Labor Mentality in Ukraine’] (2018) 22 Ekonomika ta Upravlinnia Pidpryiemstvamy 466 (in Ukrainian).

28. Pavlovska-Kravchuk V, ‘Poniattia ta sutnist pravovoho mentalitetu: metodolohiia doslidzhennia’ [‘The Concept and Essence of Legal Mentality: Research Methodology’] [2010] 4(63) Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 257-65 (in Ukrainian).

29. Pohorilko V ta Malyshko A, ‘Pravova systema – systema prava – systema zakonodavstva suverennoi Ukrainy’ [‘Legal System –System of Law – System of Legislation of Sovereign Ukraine’] (1993) 9-10 Pravo Ukrainy 10-7 (in Ukrainian).

30. Polishchuk I, ‘Poniattia “natsionalna mentalnist”’ [‘The Concept of ‘National Mentality’] [2017] 2(33) Visnyk Natsionalnoho Universytetu “Iurydychna Akademiia Ukrainy imeni Yaroslava Mudroho” 111 (in Ukrainian).

Thesis

31. Abramov A, ‘Pravovaia akkulturatsiia (na prymere Yspanyy v peryod Rymskoi Respublyky)’ [‘Legal Acculturation (on the Example of Spain in the Times of the Roman Republic)’] (аvtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2005) (in Russian).

32. Sofronova S, ‘Pravovoe nasledye y akkulturatsyia v uslovyiakh pravovoho prohressa obshchestva’ [‘Legal Heritage and Acculturation under Conditions of Legal Progress of Society’] (аvtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2000) (in Russian).

33. Zhebrovska K, ‘Pravovi tsinnosti u vzaiemodii pravovykh system’ [‘Legal Values in the Interaction of Legal Systems’] (аvtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, Natsionalnyi Universytet “Odeska Yurydychna Akademiia” 2017) (in Ukrainian).

Dissertations

34. Abrosymova Y, ‘Metodolohycheskaia rol poniatyia tsyvylyzatsyy v sotsyalnofylosofskom yssledovanyy’ [‘Methodological Role of the Concept of Civilization in a Social and Philosophical Research’] (dyss kand fylosof nauk, 2000) (in Russian).

35. Bainyiazov R, ‘Pravosoznanye y pravovoi mentalytet v Rossyy’ [‘Legal Consciousness and Legal Mentality in Russia’] (dyss d-ra yuryd nauk, 2006) (in Russian).

36. Huban R, ‘Mizhnarodno-pravovi aspekty rozvytku dialohu mizh tsyvilizatsiiamy’ [‘Aspects of International Law in the Development of Dialogues between Civilizations’] (dys kand yuryd nauk, In-t derzhavy i prava im V M Koretskoho 2009) (in Ukrainian).

37. Suparov І, ‘Social’nye dinamika, struktura i modeli mentaliteta: konceptual’noe obosnovanie’ [‘Social Dynamics, Structure and Models of Mentality: Conceptual Justification’] (diss kand filosof nauk, 2007) (in Russian).

38. Tverjakova E, ‘Juridicheskaja jekspansija: teoretiko-istoricheskoe issledovanie’ [‘Legal Expansion: Theoretical and Historical Research’] (diss kand jurid nauk, 2002) (in Russian).

Websites

39. Watson A, ‘Legal transplants and european private law’ <http://www.ejcl.org/44/art442.html?iframe=true&width=100%&height=100%> (accessed: 01.02.2019) (in English).

40. ‘Labilnist – Intelektualna, Emotsiina, Psykhichna’ <http://wlife.pp.ua/labilnistintelektualnaemocijna-psixichna.html> (accessed: 01.02.2019) (in Ukrainian).

41. Smitiukh H ta Striletskyi V, ‘Ukrainskyi Mentalitet’ [‘Ukrainian Mentality’] <http://www. myslenedrevo.com.ua/uk/Publ/SacralUkraine/Mentality.html> (accessed: 01.02.2019) (in Ukrainian).