Jerusalem, Israel — The influence of English common law on Israel’s legal system was the focus of an engaging dialogue between Lord Pannick KC and Dorit Beinisch, a former president of the Supreme Court of Israel. The discussion took place at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem as part of the Lionel Cohen lecture series, which honors the contributions of Lord Cohen of Walmer.
The conversation highlighted the substantial impact of English law during the British mandate in Palestine, particularly the reliance on established legal texts and precedents that have shaped Israeli jurisprudence since the country’s independence in 1948. Notably, even decades later, Israeli legal professionals continue to reference foundational English law textbooks, such as those authored by Salmond, Wade, and De Smith. The dialogue also emphasized how senior UK judges historically considered Israeli legal cases, fostering a unique connection between the two judicial systems.
This year’s lecture series marked a milestone for the Hebrew University, celebrating the 75th anniversary of its law faculty alongside the university’s centennial. The event attracted notable attendees, including two grandsons of Lord Cohen, who engaged in discussions about the evolving nature of law.
Pannick, a distinguished barrister, led the exchange while also addressing questions from Israeli judges and academics eager for insights into English law. Beinisch expressed admiration for Pannick’s notable success in the UK Supreme Court, where he argued against then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s attempt to prorogue Parliament in 2019, a decision she believed required significant courage.
The intriguing dialogue also explored themes such as judicial appointments, the balance of power, and landmark cases like Gouriet v. HM Attorney General. These discussions reflect the broader considerations of judicial integrity and accountability in both Israel and the UK.
The impact of English common law in shaping Israeli legal practices continues to be significant, evidence of which was palpable throughout the seminar. The conversation provided a rich platform for exploring the commonalities and differences in the two legal systems, reinforcing the importance of ongoing dialogue in the global legal community.
This article was automatically written by OpenAI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.