GLOBAL GOVERNANCE A A 2018 2019 LEGAL TRADITIONS

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE A. A. 2018 -2019 LEGAL TRADITIONS OF THE WORLD Sustainable diversity in Law Prof. Massimo Papa

LEGAL SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD

WHAT IS COMPARATIVE LAW? • Comparative Law is the study of the relationship between legal systems or between rules of more than one system, their differences and similarities. Comparative Law is a method of comparing legal systems, and such comparison produces results relating to the different legal cultures being analysed. Comparative Law also plays a role in a better understanding of foreign legal systems. Ours?

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF COMPARATIVE LAW • In the 6 th century BCE according to legend, the Greek lawgiver Solon, faced with the task of compiling the laws of Athens, gathered together the laws of various city-states. Similarly, in the 5 th century BCE, a Roman commission was reported to have consulted the statutes of the Greek communities in Sicily before giving Rome the famous Laws of the Twelve Tables. Aristotle, in the 4 th century, is said to have collated the constitutions of no fewer than 158 city-states in his effort to devise a model constitution. Thus, from ancient times it would seem that those wishing to set up a just system have sought inspiration and example from abroad. The true expansion of comparative law, however, was hindered by a number of obstacles—such as the parochialism of social groups, contempt foreigners, or “barbarians, ” and belief in the sacredness or everlasting inviolability of inherited legal rules.

PURPOSES OF COMPARATIVE LAW • First of all, there has been a tendency to view comparative law from the standpoint of its value to the historical study of legal decision making—a consideration that was responsible for establishing the first chairs of comparative law in 19 th-century Europe. Ideas regarding the place of law in society and the nature of the law itself—whether divine or secular, whether dealing with substantive or procedural rules—obviously become appreciably clearer when comparative law is joined to historical research. Indeed, to some extent historical background may aid in forecasting the future of certain national systems

Outside the WLT • A closely related consideration prompts many Western jurists, political scientists, and sociologists to acquaint themselves with non-Western methods of reasoning. Comparative studies reveal that the citizen of some countries of Asia and Africa looks upon the concept of a just social order with thoughts and feelings far removed from those of Westerners. The notions of a rule of law and of rights of the individual— fundamental to Western civilization—are not wholly recognized by those societies that, faithful to the principle of conciliation and concerned primarily with harmony within the group, do not favour excessive Western-style individualism or the modern Western ideal of legal supremacy. Thus comparative law may enable statesmen, diplomats, and jurists to understand foreign points of view, and it may frequently help to create better international understanding

Practical goals…. and consensus? • Comparative law may be used for essentially practical ends. The business executive, for instance, needs to know what benefits he may expect, what risks he may run, and generally how he should act if he intends to invest capital or make contracts abroad. It was with this purpose in mind that the first French institute of comparative law was set up in Lyon in 1920; its mission was to instruct French legal advisers on foreign trade.

USA , GERMANY, ITALY UNIDROIT • It was this practical aspect that also encouraged the growth of comparative law in the United States, where the essential aim of the law school has been usually to turn out practitioners; and one need hardly mention the strong link in Germany between big industry and the various institutes of comparative law. Sometimes it is said that studies with such a focus should not be considered a part of comparative law, but practical considerations certainly have helped to finance and promote the development of comparative legal studies in general. UNIDROIT was found in Rome and the UNIDROIT Principles (also Arabic and Chinese version) responds to this practical need (new lex mercatoria)

Aid to national law • The improvement of national legislation was the prime consideration during the 19 th century in countries that were codifying or recodifying their legal systems. Numerous later additions to the Code Napoléon, drawn up in 1804, for instance, were of foreign origin. Many other countries, of course, followed France’s lead and introduced into their own systems elements of the French Napoleonic codes and institutions of French public law. It is well worth noticing that a book on French administrative laws was published in German by Otto Mayer before Mayer felt himself able to write a textbook on German administrative law

COMPARISON AND CIRCULATION OF MODELS TRANSPLANTS AND RECEPTION • The foreign inspiration of a number of legal rules or institutions is a well-known phenomenon, sometimes so all -embracing that one speaks of “reception”—reception, for instance, of the English common law in the United States, Canada, Australia, India, and Nigeria; reception of French law in French-speaking Africa, Madagascar, Egypt, and Southeast Asia; reception of Swiss law in Turkey; and reception of both German and French law in Japan, along with even some reception of American common law. The study of comparative law has found a special place in countries where such a reception has occurred.

USE IN THE INTERNATIONAL LAW • In modern times the spirit of nationalism has often tended to frustrate the development of an international law that would overcome individual national differences. One task facing statesmen and jurists is to inject new life into this effort, adapting it to the exigencies of the modern world. Those engaging in international trade, for instance, do not know with certainty which national law will regulate their agreements, since the answer depends to a large extent on a generally undecided factor—namely, which national court will be called upon to decide the questions of competence. Thus, the sole lasting remedy would seem to be the development of an international law capable of governing all legal questions outside the jurisdiction of a single state. Such a project can succeed only through the medium of comparative law.

WHY COMPARING IN A GG WORLD? • In this age of globalization and the complexity and intertwinement of international public and private law, it plays an increasing important role in international harmonization and unification of laws, thereby leading to more international cooperation and a better world order. Legislators increasingly make use of foreign law in drafting new legislation and in more and more countries courts draw inspiration from abroad as well. The increasing importance of comparing legal systems is true not only for the academic discipline of Comparative Law as such (where the focus is usually on methodology), but also for specific areas of law.

MOREOVER • A comparative view seems particularly useful in our era of globalization with the interconnection of the markets and the accompanying necessity of orienting legal advice towards other legal systems. The topic seems to be also highly relevant because of the ongoing process of European unification, which also involves a certain degree of legal co -ordination of the English legal tradition with that of continental Europe. BREXIT?

HOW COMPARING ? • The world contains a vast number of national legal systems. The United Nations brings together representatives of more than 190 states, but these states are far outnumbered by legal networks, since not all states—notably federal ones— have accomplished unification within their own frontiers. It is thus an enormous task to try to compare the laws of all the different jurisdictions. This problem, however, should not be overly magnified. Differences between the diverse systems are not always of the same order; some are sharp; others are so closely similar that a specialist in one branch of a legal “family” often may easily extend his studies to another branch of that family.

MICRO AND MACRO COMPARISON • For this reason, one can distinguish two types of research in comparative law. The exponent of “microcomparison” analyzes the laws belonging to the same legal family. By observing their differences, he will decide whether they are justified and whether an innovation made in one country would have value if introduced elsewhere. The researcher pledged to “macrocomparison, ” on the other hand, investigates those systems differing most widely from each other in order to gain insight into institutions and thought processes that are foreign to him.

MACRO COMPARISON IS OUR PERSPECTIVE • For the “pure jurist, ” concerned mainly with legal technicalities, specialized language and skills, microcomparison holds the greater attraction whereas macrocomparison is the realm of the political scientist or legal philosopher, who sees law as a social science and is interested in its role in government and the organization of the community. GG STUDENTS

Macrocomparison • The situation differs greatly in consideration of macrocomparison. Here no comparison is possible without previously identifying and thoroughly mastering the fundamentals of the law systems as they differ from place to place. The jurist must, as it were, forget his training and begin to reason according to new criteria. If he is French, English, or American, he must recognize that in some folk societies of East Asia, the upright citizen never crosses the threshold of a courtroom and acknowledges no subjective rights; instead, the citizen’s behaviour is governed by rites handed down from his ancestors, ensuring him the approval of the community. Customs play a crucial role in the concept of Law. (Africa /Afghanistan).

What is LAW? ? • Likewise, if the Western jurist is to understand Islamic law or Hindu law, he must realize that the law is contained in rules of conduct laid down by a religion for its followers, and for its followers only. These rules, creating obligations and not rights, rank above all worldly matters and, in particular, are not to be confused with the regulations that a national government may, at a given time, enact and ratify. Further, in comparing his system of law with that of a communist country, the Westerner must remember that on no account does the citizen of a Marxist-Leninist state regard the rule of law as an ideal for society. Far from it, for his dream is to see law—which to him is synonymous with injustice and coercion —wither away in an affluent society founded on human solidarity and fellowship.

Parameters /standards • A considerable shifting of legal gears is necessary before a French or German jurist can grasp the vital importance that the English or American lawyer traditionally attaches to the concept of due processand the rules of evidence; in continental eyes, procedural rules take second place to substantive law. • The specialist of macrocomparison also picks out the structural differences existing between certain systems. Accordingly, the Anglo-American lawyer must be aware of the importance of the distinction between public and private law —between law involving the state and law involving only individuals. The jurist in a Roman-law country must, conversely, appreciate the significance of the concepts of common law (unwritten customary law of various kinds).

DEVELOPPING A SENSITIVE APPROACH • The lawyer from a centralized country must familiarize himself with the distinction between federal law and the laws of secondary jurisdictions (states, provinces, cantons, and so forth)—a distinction that is of fundamental importance in many countries. If he is from a country like England or France that acknowledges the sovereignty of the national parliament, he must give due weight to the prominence of constitutional law in countries that permit courts to review the constitutional validity of legislative acts—especially in countries such as the United States and Germany. The jurist in a “bourgeois” country must appreciate the policy of collective ownership of means of production in socialist states.

WHAT COMPARING? CONTINENTAL LAW & COMMON LAW BUT ALSO ISLAMIC LAW For quite evident reasons being Islam the second religion spread worldwide and for political implications.

Taxanomy /Families • Legal systems can be grouped into families, such as common-law, Roman, and socialist. But it must be acknowledged that the number of identifiable families and the appropriate classification of a given system are questions always open to argument. The legal system of a given country, for instance, may exhibit some features that relate it to a particular family and others that may escape that classification.

Difficulties • Such blurring of distinctions is particularly true of law in countries of Africa and the Middle East, where certain sectors of the law have been transformed by Western ideas (as in criminal and mercantile law and procedure) leaving other sectors (such as personal status, family law, and law) faithful to traditional principles of the region. The phenomenon is not peculiar to those countries, however.

In addition • Wide differences also may be detected between legal systems that are commonly regarded as belonging to the same family. American law, for instance, without hesitation is ranked as a member of the common-law family; yet countless differences set it apart from English law, in large part because the United States has a federal and England a unitary system of government

Legal traditions • There are four highly influential legal traditions in the contemporary world: civil law, common law, socialist law, Islamic law. . . [classification and taxonomy can include more legal systems such as the African ones] • A legal tradition, as the term implies, is not a set of rules of law about contracts, corporations and crimes, although such rules will almost always be in some sense a reflection of that tradition (e. g. the death penalty, marriages, the crime of homosexuality, religious freedom, press freedom, bioethics). What is a TRADITION? ? ?

LEGAL TRADITION : a definition It can be defined a set of deeply rooted, historically conditioned attitudes about the nature of law, about the role of law in the society and the polity, about the proper organization and operation of a legal system, and about the way law is or should be made, applied, studied, perfected, and taught. * • P. GLENN – Legal Traditions of the World.

Civil law • Civil law may be defined as that legal tradition which has its origin in Roman law, as codified in the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian*, and as subsequently developed mainly in Continental Europe [Bologna University, Irnerio]. • The civil law legal tradition itself can be divided further into the Romanic laws, influenced by French law, and the Germanic family of laws, dominated by German jurisprudence.

FOCUS ON THE TERM CIVIL LAW • Jus civilis was the Law of Romans, of citizens (civis), celebrated by Cicero as THE only possible Law (other were Leges Barbarum). • Then the common lawyer define continental law as civil law because it derives from jus civilis (≠ jus honorarium the law created by the praetor peregrinus through new remedies (formulas) for new situations and new people coming from all over the Roman Empire).

… • In particular the Roman laws were modeled on the groundbreaking French Code Civil from 1804 (Code Napoleon), which conquered Europe’s realm of ideas as the Napoleonic armies conquered the countries. • Also the German Civil Code B. G. B. from 1896 (in force since 1900) is a consequence of the movement toward codified laws initiated by the Code Napoleon

… • It is typical of all civil law systems that the law is almost entirely codified, highly systemized and structured and that it relies on broad, general principles, without necessarily setting out the details.

Forms of Civil Law Jurisdictions and How They Developed • Scotland South Africa, for example, received Roman law and have retained it without benefit of codification. • Continental Europe received civil law from ancient Rome and then retained it by codification, imposed for the most part by victories of Napoleon. These codes include those of Parma (1820), Sardinia (1837), the Netherlands (1838), Modena (1852), unified Italy (1865), Romania (1864), Portugal (1867) and Spain (1889). • Other jurisdictions, particularly the countries of Latin America, Egypt, imitated the French Code (or others based upon it) in enacting their codifications.

French Civil Code • The French Civil Code of 1804 was no mere consolidation or systematization of existing law, but rather was intended to be a “revolutionary code”, reflecting the achievements of the French Revolution. – designed to remake the law in the image of a new and better society. – premise that for the first time in history a purely rational law should be created moral justification – was not to be found in ancient custom or monarchical paternalism but in its conformity with the dictates of reason.

… • In fact, however, the revolutionary content of the Code (e. g. principles such as freedom and equality of all citizens and the inviolability of property) were balanced with more conservative notions, reflected especially in the pre-existing customary law of France’s northern provinces, which earlier scholars such as R. J. Pothier (1699 -1772) had striven to harmonize before the Revolution.

… • The movement towards codification which the French Civil Code set in motion also gave birth to the German Civil Code of 1896 (in force in 1900), although its terminology is more academic and technical and its rules more precise than those of the French Code. The Swiss Civil Code of 1912, by comparison, is simple and non-technical, relying heavily on general principles. The combined French, German and Swiss influenced the codifications of Brazil (1916), Mexico (1928), pre. Communist China (1931) and Peru (1936). Japan adopted the German Civil Code in 1898 and Turkey, a translation of the Swiss Code in 1926.

Scotland • Not all civilian jurisdictions have, however, codified their private law. One of the striking examples of uncodified civil law is to be found in Scotland. • the age of the “reception” of “Roman Law” in Scotland, was really the fruit of the Renaissance and the reawakening of classical learning to which the Renaissance gave birth on the Continent. Scottish lawyers, trained in the great universities such as Paris, Orléans, Utrecht and Leyden, returned home imbued with the terminology, concepts and structured thinking of Roman law and familiar with the Institutes of Gaius and the Digest of Justinian, as well as with the writings of sixteenth and seventeenth century European civilian legal scholars. Civilian rules and principles were thus incorporated into the corpus of Scots law, to supply rules and principles which the old customary law could not provide

Common law • Common law is the legal tradition, which evolved in England from the 11 th Century onwards. This legal tradition is the basis of private law not only for England as its country of origin, but also for Wales, Ireland, almost all states of the USA (except from Louisiana), most part of Canada (except from Quebec) and for most countries which received the common law tradition as former colonies of the British Empire and in many cases preserved it as independent members of the British Commonwealth, in parts connected with religious laws or local habits like in India, Pakistan, Malaysia or Jamaica.

… • The principles of common law appear for the most part in reported judgments, usually rendered by higher courts, in relation to specific fact situations arising in dispute, which courts have adjudicated. All in all common law rules seem to be more specific and detailed in comparison to civil law rules

• Prior to the 19 th century, absolute barriers between Continental law and the common law did not exist.

Magna Carta's provisions--chapter 61. • According to this chapter, if the king should fail to abide by the Charter's provisions in any particular matter, a committee of four barons should refer the matter to a larger committee of twenty-five barons, who together would "distrain and distress [the king] by seizing his castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they could until redress had been obtained. "'" In other words, to enforce the Charter, this chapter legalized and provided an institutional framework for war between the king and his vassals.

… Chapter 61, however, was not just a bad baronial idea; instead it was an adaptation of a similar remedy found in the Libri feodorum, the collection of feudal law compiled in Bologna during the 1150 s and routinely added at the end of medieval copies of the Corpus iuris civilis, which contained the basic texts of Roman law. Chapter 61 thus seems to be an adaptation from a Continental source.

SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURY COMMON LAW • The common law was vastly larger in scope and in sophistication. England was assertively Protestant in religion and had cut the ties that once connected it with the Roman Church. Moreover, common lawyers were selfconscious of the special role their law played in defining the rights and liberties of Englishmen. This was the age of Sir Edward Coke, the great English lawyer who (with Blackstone) probably did as much as any single individual to shape the common law.

… • Insularity is commonly thought to be a far more salient characteristic. J. R. Tanner's description of Coke as "a mind fanatically narrow” only slightly exaggerates the widely held view that an unbridgeable gulf existed during this era between the English common law and the cosmopolitan traditions of the European ius commune. According to this view, if there were supporters of the civil law, then they were likely to have been partisans of royal absolutism, whereas most common lawyers-the enemies of extensions of the royal prerogativenecessarily were enemies of the civil law itself.

CIVIL LAW IN THE EARLY AMERICAN REPUBLIC • American usage of Continental ideas happened where the common law cases were abundant and clear enough, but were (in the opinion of American judges) mistaken. A South Carolina decision of 1818, dealing with the question of whether the seller of goods impliedly warranted their soundness, provides a good example. English law required an express warranty. The South Carolina courts did not.

mixed jurisdiction • The classic definition of a mixed jurisdiction of nearly one hundred years ago was of F. P. Walton: “Mixed jurisdictions are legal systems in which the Romano-Germanic tradition has become suffused to some degree by Anglo. American law”.

… • Common law/civil law mixed jurisdictions include – Louisiana, Québec, St. Lucia, Puerto Rico, South Africa, Zimbabwe (formerly Southern Rhodesia), Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, Namibia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon), and Scotland.

Differences between common law and civil law • Common law and civil law legal traditions share similar social objectives (individualism, liberalism and personal rights) and they have in fact been joined in one single family, the Western law family, because of this functional similarity.

… • This difference in priority can be explained by the role of the legislator in both traditions. French civil law adopts Montesquieu’s theory of separation of powers, whereby the function of the legislator is to legislate, and the function of the courts is to apply the law. Common law, on the other hand, finds in judge-made precedent the core of its law.

Statutes – Functions • Although statutes have the same paramountcy in both legal traditions, they differ in their functions. Civil law codes provide the core of the law - general principles are systematically and exhaustively exposed in codes and particular statutes complete them. Finally follows the jurisprudence. • Common law statutes, on the other, complete the case law, which latter contains the core of the law expressed through specific rules applying to specific facts. (It is not surprising that the English word “law” means all legal rules whatever their sources, while the French word “loi” refers only to written statutory rules. The word “droit” in the French civil law is the equivalent of “law” in English common law. )

Sources of law • One of the best known distinguishing features may be the particular source of law. There is a widespread view that the two systems can be distinguished by the assertion that common law is merely judge-made case law, while codified law is the only source of law of civil law. Made with such absoluteness this distinction has never been correct.

… • On the one hand codified law does not merely exist in common law, but is even of a certain importance. In some areas of law codified law is even traditionally constitutive, e. g. in the area of antitrust. • Thus common law states have also codified laws, which derive from a legislative process and which courts have to consider in their judgments as well and beside existing judgemade precedents.

… • it is remarkable that there are some legal systems, which are related traditionally to civil law, but which also as a tradition have no classical codes as most of the civil law legal systems have. As examples may be mentioned Scotland, whose legal system is however influenced more and more by common law and therefore may better be qualified as hybrid legal system; another example is South Africa.

… • Despite this prevalent view it is clear that in both legal traditions codes do exist and are applied by practitioners, but that these codes differ in their style: While civil law codes and statutes are mostly concise and do not provide definitions but state principles in broad, general phrases, common law codifying statutes provide detailed definitions and each rule sets out lengthy enumerations of specific applications or exceptions

Principle of precedents and doctrine of stare decisis • As another distinctive feature the principle of precedents may be considered, i. e. the method of common law to analyze previous court decisions, to find a general principle in each of them and to transfer these principles to a current dispute that needs to be decided. So civil law judges may be primarily bound to codes and reason, while common law judges are subject to the so called doctrine of stare decisis and thus in the first instance are bound by precedents rendered by higher courts. According to that, common law has a more hierarchical structure.

… • On the other hand the courts in civil law countries at least feel they are bound by the decisions of the higher courts as well. Thus it is not entirely correct to assume that common law judges are strictly bound to the authority of higher courts while civil law judges are only bound to codes and reason.

… • The common law focuses on fact patterns. Judge analyzes cases presenting similar but not identical facts, extracting from the specific rules, and then, through deduction, determines the often very narrow scope of each rule, and sometimes proposes new rules to cover facts that have not yet presented themselves.

… • The civil law focuses rather on legal principles. Judge traces their history, identifies their function, determines their domain of application, and explains their effects in terms of rights and obligations

… • The doctrine of stare decisis has two components, a vertical and a horizontal one. The vertical component says that judges of lower courts are strictly bound to precedent decisions of higher courts, even if the lower court considers the decisionis not right. However, the inferior judges are free to express their opinion that they consider the binding precedent as wrong and they can also suggest an appeal

… • . According to the horizontal component of the doctrine of stare decisis, precedents are binding not only for lower courts, but also for current decisions of the court that rendered the precedent, whereas although the judges are bound to the result of the precedent, they do not have to stick to the reasons given in the precedent case. A precedent is binding until it is overruled by a decision of a higher court or until it is overridden through a statute. A higher court can also reconsider and overrule its own previous decision.

. . • But also this distinctive feature is not definite. On the one hand common law judges do not have to apply a precedent, if they point out that the alleged precedent is significantly different from the current case and therefore is not binding. . • This process of pointing out the non-application of a precedent is called ‘distinguishing’ and can be mainly based on two reasons:

… • First, there does not exist any similarity between the current case and the precedent case, e. g. because the precedent is about another area of law and the judge denies an analogy

Interpretation of laws • In civil law jurisdictions, the first step in interpreting an ambiguous law is to discover the intention of the legislator by examining the legislation as a whole, including the “travaux préparatoires”, as well as the provisions more immediately surrounding the obscure text.

… • common law statutes have to be read against a case law background, while civil law codes and statutes are the primary source of law under Montesquieu’s theory. Secondly, civil law judges are influenced by Rousseau’s theory that the State is the source of all rights under the social contract, while English judges favour Hobbes’ theory that the individual agreed to forfeit to the State only certain rights

Appointment / selection of judges • Because of the important role of judges in common law, namely to decide what is the law, judges in the common law countries, particularly judges of the higher courts, are typically selected and appointed only from among experienced practicing lawyers.

… • By contrast it may surprise common lawyers when telling them that it is quite usual in civil law to appoint young highly skilled but inexperienced graduates to judgeships. Although it is, for instance in Germany, well established practice to give recently appointed judges the opportunity to gain practical experience by serving at the beginning of their career in a chamber with two experienced judges, it is also not unusual for recently appointed judges to decide cases in lower courts as sole judges immediately after their appointment.

Procedural differences – adversarial vs. inquisitorial/proceedings • Court proceedings in common law may be described – at least in private law – as strictly adversarial. In this system the attorneys are responsible for presenting the facts of the case, the positions of each party and the legal views including all relevant precedents. In an ideal common law procedure the judge has the function only to manage the proceeding, to review all facts of the case and legal views presented to him and finally to decide the case on that basis, or when the case is tried by a judge and jury, to sum up the evidence and the legal principles for the assistance of the jury.

… • civil proceedings in civil law are depending on the parties’ (respectively their attorneys’) preferences, too, but judges have a much more active part to play than judges in common law. That is why civil law proceedings – apart from public and criminal proceedings – may be described as inquisitorial in contrast with common law proceedings. Thus civil law judges have many functions which in common law the attorneys are responsible for. • judge is generally responsible for the oral questioning of the witnesses in taking evidence. Thereby the judge asks the witnesses about the factual issues of the case, •

… another significant difference between adversarial and inquisitorial system is the manner in which they deal with experts. While in common law, as explained above, each party can bring forward and question its ‘own’ expert and the judge only has to decide which expert is more convincing, in civil law it is the judge who in most cases appoints the expert, often a sole witness, and then accepts his opinion.

Reciprocal influences • The European unification • probably more important sector where civil law influences common law, is the European unification in which England (UK) has participated since 1973. Thereby, England (UK), just like any other member of the European Union, is obligated to implement guidelines of the EU, whose style may be characterized rather as civilian. Consequently, English courts are also obligated to respect and to implement the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

… • In this context, one can say that the European Community Law und thereby the European Court of Justice as Supreme Court can be rather attributed to civil law than to common law, due to the prevalence of continental-European countries within the European Union. • The same can be said for the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisdiction of the European Court for Human Rights. By having ratified and incorporated the Convention, England (UK) has opened another avenue for civil law to influence English law. What’s going on now after BREXIT? ? . . .