ABSTRACT

These two chapters are very different in focus and emphasis. Ulick Bourke provides an informed sketch of the developments within the European Union and the world trade system that push toward free trade. By contrast, and in addition to a host of other arguments, Peter Ingram challenges and seeks to reconceptualize what he takes to be the dominant conception of international behaviour in both international law and legal philosophical thought. A detailed comparison of the two chapters would, therefore, be akin to comparing chalk and cheese. However, despite the many differences between them, both chapters can be sensibly discussed together because they are united in providing cautions against two common but rather different mistakes. The two mistakes often ensnare those who think about both the nature of law in general and the moral and political basis of any particular segment of law.