Classification of Contractual Agreements in Comparative and Islamic Jurisdictions: Does it Make Any Sense?
Abstract Comparative legal systems differ in the organization of the manifestation of parties’ expressions when making legal transactions where an external action does not reflect the real intention of this party. Most jurisdictions, including Islamic law, follow the objective theory of agreements while the Conterminal legal system adopts the subjective approach. Despite the fact that many scholars spent much efforts to clarify this classification, the importance of this classification may be modest; these legal systems organize some basic doctrines, with regard to the formation of a contract (namely: the revocability of offer, the need for communication of acceptance and the rules of interoperation), in a manner that may contradict with its general theory of making agreement. In other words, the organization of these doctrines has very little significant differences in result between these legal systems. Islamic law has the same result as well. This article aims at explaining these doctrines and differences.
COVID-19 impact on labour relations in Palestine, the need for legal reform

 Objective
 This research aims to examine how lawful the measures taken by employers against workers are in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to assess performance of the Ministry of Labour (MoL) and various trade unions in representing workers’ interests.
 
 Methodology
 After an intensive literature review on the subject, 12 cases – representing different areas and economic sectors in the West Bank – were investigated. Then, free discussions were conducted with a focus group of 24 stakeholders (employers, employees, MoL representatives, trade union representatives, businessmen association representatives, lawyers, judges, and academics) to explore decisions made against employees, examine how lawful these decisions are, and present the evaluation of these groups to the MoL and trade unions. The discussions were followed by a quantitative questionnaire for 297 employees who were affected by unfair decisions and 87 employers representing different areas and sectors in the West Bank. A brainstorming session, involving two judges, two lawyers and four legal academics, was held to discuss research outcomes and benefit from their feedback and recommendations.
 
 Research problem
 To demonstrate how lawful the measures taken by employers against workers are in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to assess performance of the MoL and various trade unions in representing workers’ interests.
 
 Findings
 The research paper reveals the illegality of the measures taken against employees in the context of responding to the economic effects of the pandemic. It reflects clear and significant dissatisfaction with the decisions made by trade unions and the MoL. The paper also recommends that some amendments need to be introduced to the Palestinian Labour Law.
 
 Originality/value
 This research paper pursues the illegality of decisions made by employers against workers in the context of addressing the economic losses caused by the pandemic. It concludes that ambiguous provisions of the Palestinian Labour Law were a main factor that allowed employers to abuse these decisions. The tripartite agreement organised by the MoL was against workers interest and gave rise to many legal and economic challenges. The need to review the structure and functioning of trade unions in the West Bank is highlighted in this research paper.

Waiver and Estoppel in Insurance Policy Litigation
Indexes to the great nineteenth century insurance texts do not list waiver and estoppel.' But times have changed. The 1951 third edition of Vance on Insurance enfolds an excellent and important seventy-six page "Waiver & Estoppel" chapter-about a fourteenth of the book's bulk. What has fostered this growth in the last hundred years? My thesis is that waiver and estoppel are two of several guises that cloak the courts' part in changing insurance from a service safely bought only by sophisticated businessmen to a commodity bought with confidence by untrained consumers. Judges, at the urging of policyholders' advocates, have used waiver and estoppel to convert insurance from a custom-made document designed in part by knowing buyers to a brand-