Focus and Scope
The Comparative Law Review is a peer-reviewed, English language journal concerned to engage with the theoretical exploration of legal systems and the mutual intersections of Law and Culture.
The principal aim of the CoLR is to reassess the understanding of comparativism so to provide an international forum for academic research and to orient the new trends of scholarly debate on central subject-matters, such as the critical construction of legal traditions, the governance of legal order, the subtle interfaces between Law and Politics, the jurisdictional projects, the undertaking of a new legal geopolitics, the economic dimension of legal changes, the mutable forms of global scenarios.
Central to CoLR’s mandate is to explore legal theory, judicial practice and public policy, inspecting the urgent issues of our age. CoLR is also devoted to stimulate and promote an interdisciplinary approach to Law, relocating classical topics in a new framework at the crossroads of law and history, law and literature, law and philosophy, law and theology, law and visual arts.
The editors invite the submission of essays, topical article, comments, critical reviews, which will be evaluated by an independent committee of referees on the basis of their quality of scholarship, originality, and contribution to reshaping legal views and perspectives. On this ground CoLR is intended to become an international high-impact journal and an essential source of reference for academics from all over the world.
Section Policies
Articoli
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
Comparative Law Review follows and refers its editors to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.Comparative Law Review’s system of peer review is double-blind: manuscripts are reviewed by two independent experts in the relevant area. The reviewers make a scientific assessment and a recommendation to the editors. Reviewers remain unknown to authors. The Editorial Board considers the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments before making a final decision either to accept, accept with revision or to reject a manuscript.
Authors are advised not to submit plagiarized articles. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines as far as is practicable.
Submitted papers found to be plagiarized or to include false or fabricated data prior to publication will be returned to the author immediately with a request for an explanation. If no explanation is received or if the explanation provided is considered unsatisfactory, the journal will notify the authors’ institution. Comparative Law Review may also refuse to accept further submissions from the author for a defined period.
Open Access Policy
The articles and contributions are published in the Comparative Law Review in open
access and are under a Creative Commons Licence
Code of Conduct
Comparative Law Review
Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines
for Editors, Editorial Staff and Peer-reviewers
Comparative Law Review encourages all participants in the publishing process to adhere to established principles of ethical publishing. This process involves authors, reviewers, Editorial Board and Staff and this journal elaborates a set of rules in order to maintain he highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices. The Comparative Law Review Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Editors, Editorial Staff and Peer-reviewers is mainly based on theCode of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors(Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).
a. Authors
Authors are required to submit only original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.
Comparative Law Review expects all published articles to contain clear and accurate attribution of authorship. It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that all authors that contributed to the work are fairly acknowledged and that the published author list accurately reflects individual contributions. Where authorship disputes arise, Comparative Law Review encourages the Editorial Staff to follow the COPE guidelines detailed here. Where authors employ the services of third party agencies prior to submission, for instance in language editing or manuscript formatting/preparation, they must ensure that all services comply with the following guidelines.
Comparative Law Review is not responsible for any plagiarism concerning any articles submitted. Plagiarized articles will be rejected outright. If any plagiarized article is published, it will be deleted from our website and contents. Authors are fully responsible for plagiarism and Comparative Law Review encourages the Editorial Staff to follow the COPE guidelines detailed here.
b. Submission Process
Comparative Law Review takes every effort to ensure that Editorial Board, Editorial Staff and reviewers treat all submissions respectfully, in confidence, and in accordance with COPE ethical guidelines. Comparative Law Review expects that all individuals submitting manuscripts abide by established publishing standards and ethics. In proven cases of misconduct, the action taken will vary by context, but could result in one or more of the following:
Retraction of published work.
Publication of a correction or statement of concern.
Refusal of future submission.
Notification of misconduct sent to an author’s institution.
Comparative Law Review evaluate submissions on the understanding that they have not been simultaneously submitted to another journal. Comparative Law Review encourages the Editorial Staff to investigate allegations of redundant publication thoroughly and in accordance with COPE guidelines detailed here. Comparative Law Review keeps a clear record of all communications between authors, editors, and reviewers regarding the submissions they handle. These records are carefully stored and may be used to facilitate investigations into possible cases of misconduct. Where necessary we will contact and/or co-operate with other publishers and journals to identify cases of redundant publication.
c. Editors
Comparative Law Review expects editors to declare competing interests at the point of agreeing their position and update them annually. Our editor agreement obliges the editor to declare any potential conflict of interest that might arise during the term of editorship prior to entry into any agreement or position.
Editors are required to recuse themselves from individual manuscripts if they themselves have a potential conflict of interest and to avoid creating potential conflicts of interest through assignment of handling editors or peer reviewers.
The Editorial Board is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will receive offers for publication upon approval by double-blind peer-review.
The Editorial Board will evaluate manuscripts without taking into consideration authors’ race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, sexual orientation or political ideology. The decision will be based on the paper’s originality and clarity, on the impact of the study on the legal discipline and its relevance to the Comparative Law Review’s mission. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.
d. Referees
We encourage the Editorial Board and Editorial Staff to consider potential conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers. Where a reviewer declares potential conflict of interest the Editorial Board must select alternative reviewers. Failure to declare conflict of interest may result in removal of the reviewer from the journal database.
e. Peer review and reviewer conduct
Comparative Law Review follows and refers its editors to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.Comparative Law Review’s system of peer review is double-blind: manuscripts are reviewed by two independent experts in the relevant area. The reviewers make a scientific assessment and a recommendation to the editors. Reviewers remain unknown to authors. The Editorial Board considers the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments before making a final decision either to accept, accept with revision or to reject a manuscript.
Authors are advised not to submit plagiarized articles. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines as far as is practicable.
Submitted papers found to be plagiarized or to include false or fabricated data prior to publication will be returned to the author immediately with a request for an explanation. If no explanation is received or if the explanation provided is considered unsatisfactory, the journal will notify the authors’ institution. Comparative Law Review may also refuse to accept further submissions from the author for a defined period.
f. Confidentiality
Editors, Editorial Staff and reviewers handle all submissions in confidence. If a reviewer wishes to delegate the review or seek the opinion of a colleague on a specific aspect of the paper, they are expected to clear this with the Editorial Board in the first instance.
g. Final Remarks
The Comparative Law Review encourages editors and Editorial Staff to follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors and reviewers to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers in any situation not specifically mentioned or discussed in this document.