Any classification of legal systems, even if it is called "common" is bound to be broad and loose. This is, largely, due to the lack of clear distinctions, and the existence of overlaps, within the legal realm, since law deals with complex relations among human beings. This is why, even when we discuss "common world" legal systems, we use various approaches to, and bases for, classification, like "socio-economic", "constitutional" or "international", among others.' (Dr. Jen Makini, in her lecture on The Fluidity of Classifications of World Legal Systems)

(a)    Using the various approaches and bases referred to by Dr. Makini, demonstrate the fluidity of classifications in world legal systems.                                                

(b)   To what extent is this fluidity reflected in the classification of laws in the Kenyan 'legal system'?                                                                              

(c)    In your view, is the Kenyan 'legal system' dualist, hybrid, pluralist, or other?                                

QUESTION 1

(a)   Why is there a need for 'legal reasoning' whenever one is dealing with legal rules and principles?                                                                            

(b)   With illustrative examples, critically examine three of the approaches to legal reasoning.