IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pluralism and deformalisation as mechanisms in the achievement of more equitable and just outcomes – the move from „Classical Formalism“ to deformalisation


  • Ojo, Marianne


By tracing the development and evolvement of certain legal theories over the centuries, as well as consequences emanating from such developments, this paper highlights how and why a shift from the model of „classical formalism“ towards more deformalised models has arisen. The paper also illustrates how deformalisation and „a corresponding loss of certainty“ could be harnessed in order to provide for greater „realism“ and externalities, whilst still attaining a respectable level of consistency. Developments and efforts aimed at exploring the applicability of classical formalism and deformalised models should be regarded as „an endeavour to establish a consistency of terms, as well as a probing into how far principles, notions, and rules for decision making can be generalised, and rectification when generalisations have gone too far.“ Unity, as well as „a common law of mankind“ are goals which are still capable of being achieved even where fragmentation, diversification and pluralisation of the law occur. Such processes of specialisation, where correspondingly countered by the appropriate level of generality as well as the ability to apply rules – such that they are consistently applied in similar situations, are capable of achieving more equitable, just and unifying goals as opposed to a model which merely strives for the achievement of legal certainty. Looking beyond the borders of legal theory may indeed provide the much needed redress in situations where generalisations exceed the required limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Ojo, Marianne, 2011. "Pluralism and deformalisation as mechanisms in the achievement of more equitable and just outcomes – the move from „Classical Formalism“ to deformalisation," MPRA Paper 32360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:32360

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    pluralism; ethics; fragmentation; formalisation; rules; legal certainty; legal theory; plausible constitutionalism; realism; regulation; accountability;

    JEL classification:

    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • G3 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:32360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.