<p>This article critically interrogates the epistemological foundations of legal transfers in Uzbekistan, moving beyond conventional explanations based on legal families, colonial legacies, or functionalist efficiency. Study challenges taken-for-granted notions of ‘success,’ ‘efficiency,’ and ‘adaptation,’ revealing them as socially and politically constructed rather than empirically grounded. Legal transfers are reconceptualized as epistemological exercises rooted in two core assumptions: first, that the success of certain countries results directly from their legal norms; and second, that these norms are intrinsically effective and transferable across contexts. However, our findings reveal that local actors rarely investigate causal relationships; instead, these assumptions are taken for granted. This implicit, untested causal logic – appears to be a defining epistemic feature of legal transfer practice. The study highlights selective legal transfers, where actors borrow from legal systems such as Germany, China, Vietnam, Georgia, and Russia – based on shared heritage, perceived success, relevance, or developmental aspiration. It introduces the concepts of multi-layered and second-order legal transfers, where legal norms are filtered through intermediary models and legitimized by narratives of global modernity. deeply embedded within global power structures, reflecting local agency, symbolic legitimacy, and strategic adaptation. We also challenge the myth of ‘adaptation’ often promoted in legal transfer literature, showing it to be used to legitimize power-driven choices rather than reflect genuine local needs. Study introduces a typology of legal transfers based on epistemic logics– prestige, success, conformity, and functional/performative – that reveals how symbolic authority, perceived performance success, and global power relations shape legal development choices and reform trajectories.</p>