10.6092/issn.2531-6133/8574
application/pdf
2531-6133
8574
1
en
Sara Olla
University of Bologna Law Review
Editorial
Text.Serial.Journal
https://bolognalawreview.unibo.it/
2
Editorial
2017-10-01
2018-09-26
2017-05-08
2019-02-14
I-II
UBLR
Sara Olla
2017/10/01
10.6092/issn.2531-6133/8574
I
2531-6133
1
en
II
Editorial
https://bolognalawreview.unibo.it/article/download/8574/8333
2
                           UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA LAW REVIEW




                                     Editorial
                                        Vol. 2



The University of Bologna Law Review, since its debut as an editorial project,
has focused its attention on a wide spectrum of topical issues about Law and
legal development. The initial idea was to prevent the well-known complaint
about law reviews that have lost touch with the practice of law and have
shifted away from practical, doctrinal subjects to more obscure and
theoretical ones.1

       The choice to deal with several legal topics rather than focusing only
on a few derives from a complete awareness that only by opening to a general
analysis of the legal phenomenon can we gain insight to what it means to be a
jurist in a multifaceted context which involves continuous dialogue among
Courts, legal systems and juridical traditions.

        For this reason our Journal wants to offer Readers the chance to view
the current functions of Law in all their complexity, both appreciating how
intricately it is woven into our society and using its interdisciplinarity in
analysing the legal phenomenon.

        This is the key to interpreting the second volume: the
interdisciplinarity of legal matters that joins together with the trans-
disciplinarity of social knowledge. It is a positive combination of approaches
that aims to provide a dialogue between different sectors that belong to the
same family of studies, a dialogue that is also able to highlight common
points and concurrent perspectives for a genuine system of intersubjective
relations.

       In this way, Law rediscovers its proper essence as “ars”, reconciling
its technicality with its postmodern axiology. According to the dialectical
method, this allows reaching a higher purpose, i.e. ‘to give each his due’ or as
the Latins said “suum cuique tribuere”.2

       We would like to thank the Authors for giving us the opportunity of
publishing their work in accordance with the philosophy of open-access,
without whom we would not have achieved this result. We are also grateful to
our International Revisors who have carefully verified the scientific value of

1
  Thomas L. Fowler, Law Reviews and Their Relevance to Modern Legal Problems, 24
CAMPBELL L. REV. 47 (2001).
2
  D.1.1.10pr.




                                          I
all our contributions. Lastly, the valuable quality of the volume is guaranteed
by our Associate Editors who have prepared these pages according to the
necessary citation and stylistic conventions, fostering a more widespread
availability in both the national and international legal culture.

       Now that we are at the conclusion of this volume, we feel strongly
aware that the entire Editorial Board has reached another level of maturity.
As Professor Merrill from Columbia Law School said: “Law reviews rest on the
following unstated bargain: Students supply free labor. In return, they get the
prestige and the educational experience of running a professional journal”.3

       The University of Bologna Law Review is then certain to have refined
the mentality4 of its members, to have offered them new understandings and
above all to have given them the possibility of becoming better lawyers in the
future.5



                                                                          October, 2017


                                                   Francesco Cavinato, JD Candidate
                                                               Sara Olla, JD Candidate




3
  Thomas W. Merrill, The Digital Revolution and the Future of Law Reviews, 99 MARQ.
L. REV. 1108 (2016).
4
  The “participation on law review remains the best training for a wide variety of legal
jobs that require precision, analytic rigor, excellent writing and editing skills, and a
perfectionist’s work ethic… Faculty who just see the law review as a place to print
their articles are missing the larger picture. Law review is part of the legal educational
experience, with valuable lessons to be learned by everyone involved in the process—
even authors. Rather than wresting control from students, we should be working with
them to improve upon a storied institution.”Cameron Stratcher, Reading, Writing,
and Citing: in Praise of Law Reviews, 52 N.Y. L. SCH. L. REV. 470 (2008).
5
  Again, Merrill, supra note 3 “It instills all sorts of good habits: attention to detail,
insistence on accuracy, continual striving for clarity in expression, intellectual
honesty. Serving as an editor makes you a better wordsmith, and all lawyers are
ultimately wordsmiths . . . scholarship and the benefits of a rigorous editing process
by the best students, at no out-of-pocket cost.”.




                                            II
