For all aspects of health, there are binding rules that govern the rights and responsibilities of governments, health workers, companies, civil society and a country’s population. Together these rules make up the legal framework, or legal architecture for health. They take many forms including: statutory laws, regulatory and administrative laws, contracts, case law, and customary laws. Who is involved in making these rules, and the form they take, differs from country to country.

Health laws are used to formalize commitment to goals, such as the goal of universal health coverage, creating a drive for action. To enable cooperation and achieve health goals, people use law to create different organizations (such as hospitals) and relationships (such as contracts for providing health services). In turn, organizations (whether health ministries, the private sector or civil society) have mandates, policies and strategies based on legal rules that guide their work.

There are also many rules that structure what health organizations and individuals should do, and what they may not do. This interaction between different health laws results in health system functions being carried out and health products and services being delivered.


Transplantation of EU Law into Central Eastern Europe
Beata Kviatek
Pages: 492 pages
Shipping Weight: 800 gram
Published: 5-2015
Publisher: WLP
Language: US
ISBN (softcover) : 9789462402249

Product Description


What conditions drive or impede the transfer and reception of laws and how? In other words, what is the social explanation of legal transplantation – one of the most common forms of legal change? The answers to these questions are important not only for social and legal scholars, but also for designers of legal reforms. This book presents an interdisciplinary attempt to explain the legal transplantation process by identifying conditions that shaped transplantation of EU regulatory rules to Central Eastern
Europe. Based on a critical review of literature, the author developed an analytical framework for describing the pattern of legal transplantation. The comparison of general approximation in Lithuania and Poland revealed the determining importance of
institutional and ideational conditions, whereas structural and psychological conditions, differently from what is often claimed in the literature, appeared to be less important.
Indeed, during the early period of integration, both countries opted for American legal transplants despite growing proximity with the EU. During pre-accession institutional and ideational conditions were responsible for delay in approximation in Lithuania and progress in Poland. Analysis of transplantation of EU competition policy and state aid control rules confirmed the importance of institutional and ideational conditions, although different from sets of conditions in general approximation process. It is concluded that legal transplantation patterns are better explained by arguments
relying on institutional and ideational logic, rather than on  structural or psychological, and that sets of shaping conditions differ per policy area and phase of the transfer process.