ABSTRACT
Transferability finds an eloquent supporter with Alan Watson, the guru of transplants. Teubner and J. W. F. Allison support the conditionality of transferability but apply the exact opposite criterion, namely that of divergence: only differences enhance our understanding of law in a given society. The prevailing view in the theory of comparative law is expressed by Jhering, K. Zweigert and H. Kotz, who view the question of comparability and subsequent transferability through the relative prism of functionality. A qualifier to Watson's liberal approach can be introduced via Zweigert and Kotz's functionality theory. The criterion for the transferability of institutions, solutions and texts is that of functionality. In order to accept transferability of legislative techniques and doctrines it is imperative to identify a common factor, which can serve as a functionality glue allowing transferability between laws, institutions and legislative solutions. In contrast to efficacy, effectiveness is focused on legislative drafting and can be assigned to the drafting team.
