方法对比

	比较判例法分析	教义法学研究
领域	田野方法	田野方法
方法族	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
起源年份	Late 19th–20th century (systematic comparative law from ~1900; case-focused comparative methodology consolidated ~1970s–1990s)	19th century (systematised ~1860s–1880s in common law jurisdictions)
提出者	Comparative law tradition (Zweigert, Kötz, MacCormick, Summers and others)	Common law tradition; systematised by jurists such as A.V. Dicey and John Austin
类型	Qualitative legal research method	Legal-analytical research method
开创性文献	MacCormick, D. N., & Summers, R. S. (Eds.). (1991). Interpreting Statutes: A Comparative Study. Dartmouth. ISBN: 978-1855210264	Hutchinson, T. (2013). Researching and Writing in Law (3rd ed.). Thomson Reuters. ISBN: 9780455229829
别名	cross-jurisdictional case analysis, comparative judicial analysis, transnational case law comparison, CCLA	black-letter law research, legal doctrine analysis, analytical jurisprudence, traditional legal scholarship
相关	6	6
摘要	Comparative case law analysis is a qualitative legal research method that systematically examines and contrasts judicial decisions from two or more legal systems or jurisdictions. By placing rulings side by side, the method identifies convergences, divergences, and the underlying legal reasoning that shapes how courts address similar legal questions across different national or regional contexts.	Doctrinal legal research is the foundational methodology of legal scholarship. It systematically identifies, reads, and analyses authoritative legal sources — statutes, case law, constitutional texts, and regulations — to describe, explain, and critique the content and internal logic of legal doctrine. By working within the accepted hierarchy of legal sources, it answers the question 'What is the law?' with analytical rigour and interpretive precision, producing descriptions of settled doctrine and arguments for how ambiguities should be resolved.