Search

The present work focuses on the comparative study of the Calcium looping CO2 capture capacity and stability along 10 or 20 calcination-carbonation cycles, of three different marble powder wastes (MW) and two calcite samples (one from West Bank and another provided by CIMPOR) using a gas mixture with a /sub>CO2 concentration of 25% to mimic the real flue gases CO2 concentration in the cement industry. Very high initial carbonation (first cycle) conversions were obtained using the MW sorbents tested, which is a very interesting and promising result when compared with the initial carbonation conversions of the natural calcite sorbent currently used in industry as raw material for the cement production. For the Calcium-looping conditions used, the MW sorbent tested on the fixed bed reactor unit exhibits better cyclic stability with a lower sorbent deactivation with the number of cycles than the natural calcite resource used for the cement production. The presence of 5% of steam in the feed gas mixture with air atmosphere leads to significant differences on the sorbents cyclic performance when comparing with the results obtained for the standard calcination conditions. For both MW and calcite sorbent samples selected and tested on the fixed bed rector unit in the presence of steam, a lower CaO carbonation conversion is observed along the first 7 cycles, but a higher cyclic stability reaching a CaO conversion plateau, with a lower deactivation after 20 cycles, when comparing with the results for the standard calcination conditions. An improved sorbent stability for Ca-looping CO2 capture was observed during the carbonation-calcination cycles in the presence of steam which could allow reducing the make-up of CaO frequency along the time and the costs associated. The selection of suitable marble wastes as CaO-based sorbents, the improvement of their performance and the incorporation of exhausted sorbents in the clinker, can contribute to reducing the CO2 footprint of cement production and avoid the production of wastes associated to the marble producers.

The threat of “blowback” from foreign fighters, unaffiliated volunteers who join an insurgency in a distant land, has led states to explore a variety of normative mechanisms. Among these is the international legal regime applicable to mercenaries. This short paper considers the evolution of mercenarism and the efforts to regulate it. Attempts to fit foreign fighters into that normative category are unlikely to succeed. In part this is due to the question of motivation, which is central to most definitions of mercenary and focuses on private gain. But it is also linked to the reasons for regulation in the first place: mercenaries are seen as threats in the states to which they travel, while foreign fighters are primarily deemed threats by the states to which they might return.

Studies of representations of the police are important because they affect what people think about the police as an organization, what people expect from day-to-day interactions with police officers, and how police officers themselves work in the media-saturated context of contemporary Western societies. This study is based on an approach, which does not strictly separate studies of the police as an organization from studies of how the police are represented. In this paper, I formulate a methodological framework for analysing representations of societal and state institutions in TV series, and I use this framework to then answer the question of how the police are represented in contemporary police TV series in Russia. This paper based on a single-case semiotic study of a popular Russian TV series called Glukhar’. I consider the show’s social and cultural contexts as well as its symbolic structures, such as visual and audial elements and its narrative. I develop a narrative model of the show, argue that the most prominent motif of the show is justification of the police’s illegal actions, and finally build a typology of these justifications. I propose a detailed analysis of two types of justifications and ultimately conclude that the TV show represents the police estranged from the state but not from society. Finally, I argue that my methodological framework can be applied to other TV series in studies, which address representations of societal and state institutions.

This article is an invited response to the White Paper of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System's Honoring Families Initiative on the court and separating and divorcing families. While the White Paper explores many topics, including family court functions, the limitations of the adversary process, the effects of divorce and separation on children and parents, and court and community collaborations, among others, this article focuses on the family court itself - its mission, its function, and its structure. Given the increasing numbers of people using the courts to resolve their family legal disputes, this perspective is important. For example, in Maryland during fiscal year 2013, forty-four percent of the total trial court filings involved family and juvenile cases, exceeding the portion devoted to either criminal or other civil cases. In fact, as the White Paper points out, "[t]he family courts have, in effect, become an emergency room for family problems when separating and divorcing parents have nowhere else to turn for help in addressing their problems with each other and their children." With that in mind, family courts likely are not going to disappear. Thus, they are worthy of our efforts to structure or restructure them so that they are as helpful to children and families as possible.

Citrus ranks as the fourth most important type of fruit produced in the Philippines after banana, mango,and pineapple. Citrus nobilis, which is grown primarily in Guimaras and the Panay islands, is sold mainly for its juice and pulp while the peels and the leaves are left to waste. In order to maximize the value of the plant, essential oils will be extracted from both the peels and leaves of C. nobilis via steam distillation. Physicochemical analysis of the dalanghita peel (PEO) and leaf (LEO) essential oils will determine their potential application in the industry. Investigation of their physical properties showed that the density, color, odor, congealing point, and refractive index of both essential oils were nearly identical. GC-MS analysis identified seven compounds in the PEO, and twelve compounds in the LEO. D-limonene, gamma-Terpinene, beta-Linalool, and diethyl phthalate were identified to be present in both essential oils. Antioxidant property of the oils were tested using the 1,1-diphenyl-2- picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) assay with the LEO showing an IC50 = 150ppm while the PEO has an IC50 = 493 ppm. Antibacterial properties of the oils were tested using the Kirby Bauer Disc Diffusion method where both oils showed activity against E. coli and S. aureus.

The right to health care is considered as being fundamental to the physical, emotional and mental well-being of all individuals. Similarly, it is considered a necessary condition for the exercise of other human rights. Emergency medical treatment (EMT) on the other hand, although an important component of the right to health, has not received the same recognition as a human right on its own. EMT is still deemed a luxury in developing countries with Kenya being no exception. In essence, the right to emergency health care is unwittingly detached from the right to health. This perhaps explains why some countries like South Africa and Kenya have recognized the significance of including in their constitutions an express provision creating an obligation, albeit from a negative right, requiring that no one be denied EMT. In Kenya, Article 43(2) provides, ‘A person shall not be denied emergency medical treatment’. What does this mean and does it place any obligation on the state to ensure the realization of this right as a social justice issue? If it does, what sort of obligation is this? Consequently, this paper seeks to identify Kenya’s position with respect to its obligation which makes it unconstitutional to refuse a person EMT. What has the country done, in terms of legislative and policy formulation, to realize this constitutional ‘negative right’? Does this obligation extend to private medical practitioners or is it limited to public hospitals?

Michael B. Mukasey, a former Attorney General of the United States (and former Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York), has stated that if former Secretary of State (and former Senator) Hillary Clinton is convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2071, then she is disqualified from holding the presidency. See Transcript, MSNBC MORNING JOE (Aug. 24, 2015, 06:45:25 AM), Online. Likewise, a Washington, DC think tank has just published a white paper taking the same position. See Legal Analysis of Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Private Server to Store Email Records, CAUSE OF ACTION: ADVOCATES FOR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY (Aug. 24, 2015), available online. Mukasey’s and Cause of Action’s position is fundamentally misconceived; indeed, neither puts forward any authority for the position that Section 2071 or any other federal statute creates or could create a disqualification in regard to any elected federal position, including the presidency.

On 11 July 2013, the Hong Kong government released a consultation document on the treatment of parody under the copyright regime. Building on two earlier consultations on digital copyright reform launched in December 2006 and April 2008, this latest consultation identified three legislative options: (1) clarifying the existing general provisions for criminal sanctions; (2) introducing a specific criminal exemption for parody; and (3) introducing a fair dealing exception for parody. In addition to parodies, these options may cover satires, caricatures, pastiches and other forms of imitations.Commissioned by the Journalism Media Studies Centre of the University of Hong Kong and submitted to the Hong Kong government as part of its consultation exercise, this position paper asserts that none of the three identified options alone can adequately address the needs, interests and concerns of internet users. Each option has its strengths and weaknesses, and each serves its own purpose. Because these options are not mutually exclusive, this paper recommends the adoption of all three options in combination with a fourth unidentified option – an exception for predominantly noncommercial user-generated content (UGC). The last option is badly needed because even a broad, unlimited copyright exception for parody, satire, caricature or pastiche would not cover most of the derivative creations generated by internet users.This position paper begins by examining each individual option identified in the consultation document. It argues that both civil and criminal exceptions, with appropriate qualifications, should be created for parodies, satires, caricatures and pastiches. It also explains why a separate criminal exception will be needed even if a fair dealing exception is to be adopted. The paper then articulates the need for the introduction of a predominantly noncommercial UGC exception, similar to the one Canada recently adopted. It further explains why creating exceptions in the copyright regime would benefit both copyright owners and internet users. The paper concludes by identifying four related issues that deserve legislative attention.

The White Paper on Damages Actions for Breach of the EC competition rules adopted by the Commission in April 2008 was criticized for several issues. One of those issues was that if the Commission imposes a fine on a given undertaking, actions for damages in jurisdictions which allow for punitive sanctions against that same undertaking for the same actions will be precluded. This paper argues that ne bis in idem does not preclude actions for damages in jurisdictions with punitive sanctions even if the Commission has already imposed a fine on that undertaking for the same acts.

This short paper originates in the speech given by his author at the opening ceremony of the 5th Research Forum of the European Society of International Law. The speech provides remarks on the theme of the conference ('International Law as a Profession') and introduces the two subsequent keynote speeches by Andreas Paulus and Anne Orford. The paper particularly draws on the various sets of rationalities which enable international lawyers to act intelligibly, to be understood and to convince and allow them to stabilize meaning for the members of their epistemic community.

This short paper formed the basis for a presentation to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Education and Social Protection, a committee of the Irish Parliament. The paper addresses the General Scheme of the Gender Recognition Bill 2013. While welcoming aspects of the General Scheme, the paper suggests various enhancements, including in aspects of the Scheme relating to age and the single status requirement.

This short paper examines the conflicting jurisprudence in Canada on judicial review for adequacy of reasons given by an administrative decision-maker. The Supreme Court of Canada will soon hear arguments on this issue (Fall 2011) in Newfoundland and Labrador (Treasury Board) v. Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union. This paper was presented in Calgary at the Energy Regulatory Forum hosted by the Alberta Utilities Commission in May 2011.

In December 2010, the European Commission published a Green Paper that proposes various actions to encourage the recognition of civil status documents across the EU and invited comments on its proposals. The Green Paper followed on from a public consultation on citizens' rights which sought to identify concrete actions that could be taken to tackle the challenges and obstacles faced by citizens when exercising their rights as citizens of the European Union. This response recommends the mutual recognition of civil status documents and identifies the practical steps which such recognition should entail. It also makes recommendations for the harmonisation of national procedures for the recognition of civil status documents issued by non-EU authorities through the incorporation of the Hague Convention on Apostille Certificates at the EU level.

Every year, a number of major industrial catastrophes occur in the United States. They often result in tragic losses in terms of human life and environmental degradation. They also produce substantial losses for the U.S. economy, sidelining industrial capacity and wasting millions, if not billions, of dollars. While such catastrophes are not entirely preventable, two bedrock U.S. legal institutions – the regulatory and civil justice systems – offer powerful tools for avoiding them, if they are permitted to function effectively. In recent years, however, both the regulatory and civil justice systems have been marked by dysfunction and constraints. Years of attack by the anti-regulatory and tort reform movements, respectively, have left these systems unable to fulfill their respective functions, and set the stage for major catastrophes like the BP oil spill. Unless these systems are reinvigorated and freed from unnecessary constraints, the likelihood of another industrial catastrophe will remain unacceptably high. This white paper carefully examines the BP oil spill as a case study in regulatory failure and the erosion of tort law. The paper first explains how the regulatory and civil justice systems form a complex and dynamic partnership for protecting both people and the environment. Next, it reviews both regulatory failures and civil justice constraints that affected the offshore oil drilling industry, and how they enabled BP’s corporate culture – which willingly sacrificed worker safety and environmental protection in pursuit of ever-greater profits – to thrive. The paper concludes by exploring potential legal reforms that could reduce or eliminate some of the civil justice constraints that contributed to the BP oil spill. While regulatory failures and civil justice constraints contributed to the BP oil spill, the civil justice system still has a chance to help remedy the situation by holding BP accountable for its negligent or perhaps reckless behavior, and by adequately compensating the victims of this catastrophe. At the moment, it appears that the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) – the BP-established $20 billion alternative settlement fund being administered by Ken Feinberg – will serve as the primary mechanism by which many of the oil spill victims will seek compensation. It is still unclear how well this settlement process or the more traditional civil justice system will fulfill their corrective justice functions in this case. However, if these legal mechanisms are going to deter unreasonably risky action by oil companies in the future, it is imperative that they play their corrective justice roles well by compensating the victims for all of their losses in the months and years to come. The effective functioning of these compensation mechanisms, along with the implementation of the reforms discussed in this paper, will help us to better avoid industrial catastrophes in the future.

Will an optional instrument on contract law result in social dumping? In this paper it is argued that this is likely to occur especially with respect to b2b contracts. This educated guess is made on the basis of empirical research concerning the Societas Europea and a choice of law in international contracts. This issue has been raised by the publication of the European Commission’s Green Paper on ‘policy options for progress towards a European Contract Law for consumer and businesses’, in which the European Commission initiates a consultation with respect to the future of European contract law.

Taking as its point of departure, a Green Paper published by the UK government in 2008 urging greater emphasis on responsibilities, this essay considers various senses of "responsibility" that may be thought important in and around the topic of individual rights. Most likely, the authors of the Green Paper had in mind responsibilities that are correlative to rights and responsibilities that qualify rights or limit their exercise. But an additional idea - which has not been properly considered - is the idea of rights which ARE (in large part) responsibilities, rights which embody responsibilities. An obvious example is the right of a parent to bring up his or her child; it is certainly a right, but it makes reference to an important task that has to be fulfilled in society (the upbringing and nurture of this child) and it assigns that task as a responsibility to the parents and protects them in that assignment (while also supervising them in their performance of it). Once you start thinking in these terms, many rights or claims of right have this structure: think, for example, of the right of gay people to serve in the military; or, from an earlier period, the right of women to serve on juries. In exploring this conception of "responsibility-rights," I relate it to the topic of dignity, inasmuch as the human dignity principle retains some aspects of dignity's earlier association with rank and role. I consider the possibility that human dignity generally can be understood as a source of responsibilities as well as rights, or - along the lines of my conception - as a source of protected normative positions which comprise elements of both. I don't suggest that all rights have this form, but I believe it is a highly illuminating conception nonetheless.

On December 3, 2008, the Commission issued its Guidance on the Commission's Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 EC Treaty to Abusive Exclusionary Conduct by Dominant Undertakings (the “Guidance Paper”). This marks the end of the Commission's review on art. 82, which the Commission initiated in the summer of 2003. Prior to the Guidance Paper, DG Competition (“DG Comp”) released its Discussion Paper on the Application of Article 82 of the Treaty to Exclusionary Abuses in December 2005 (the “Discussion Paper”). This was an unusual step compared to the Commission's normal practice of producing a Green Paper, and may hint at a disagreement within the Commission as to publishing guidelines at all. The Discussion Paper was a staff paper, which was meant only for consultation to allow interested parties to express their view on a text that might become substantive guidelines later. It was not an authoritative source or even published in the Official Journal. Despite being no more than a staff discussion paper, it was drafted as substantive guidelines, which raised expectations of the Commission issuing substantive guidance at a later stage. Against these expectations, the Commission issued enforcement priorities on art. 82. This naturally raises two questions: (i) why did the Commission decide to issue enforcement priorities instead of substantive guidelines; and (ii) is the Guidance Paper in its current form a good solution? This paper explains the Commission's uneasy relationship with case law in this area of law, its desire to develop its policy beyond the framework of the Community Courts -- the Court of First Instance (CFI) and European Court of Justice (ECJ) -- and why “enforcement priorities” is not an ideal solution.

This white paper discusses the negotiations during the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court held in Rome, Italy in 1998 that resulted in the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was drafted in my capacity as head of the delegation of the Geneva-based International Service for Human Rights on the basis of my delegation's notes, our discussions with delegates, official Conference documents, and reports issued by NGOs and the Coalition for an International Criminal Court during the Conference. The paper provides a brief overview of the Statute with an emphasis on the way in which the key outstanding issues were resolved at the Diplomatic Conference and the positions taken by various delegations. It focuses on the debates surrounding substantive law and the jurisdictional regime at the expense of the more technical provisions governing the conduct of investigations and trial.

The paper offers an empirical analysis of private antitrust enforcement in Germany based on cases that were decided by courts between 2005 and 2007. The study presents information about the magnitude and nature of civil antitrust actions in Germany. The data includes inter alia, information about the courts involved in litigation, the relationship of the parties, affected industries, the remedies sought, the outcome of the claim, the alleged anticompetitive conduct, the proportion of stand-alone and follow-on litigation, and the length of proceedings before a given court. The study shows that a large number of private cases were concluded even when compared with public investigations in Germany. It seems that private antitrust actions complement rather than duplicate public enforcement efforts because of the overwhelming proportion of stand-alone claims and the amount of actions based on the abuse of market power. Only a small number of litigants asked for the compensation of loss suffered from anticompetitive conduct. Interpreting the results from the study cautiously, the paper suggests that the European Commission and other stakeholders may have misunderstood the nature of private actions in Germany (and maybe Europe) and, consequently, asked the wrong question, focusing on compensation. Expensive damages actions for the breach of the antitrust rules might not be as important as commonly assumed.

Joseph Genovesi, President of RD Legal Funding gives a brief synopsis of the legal funding industry. In this white paper, the reader will gain a basic understanding of a few methods that can be used for legal financing.

American Indians' status as citizens of federal, state, and tribal nations has been riddled with ambiguity since the Founding of the American Republic. This short paper surveys the history and law of Native political rights in the American constitutional structure before concluding with a discussion about special problems in tribal elections.

There can be little doubt of the interdependency of successful economic development, viable business enterprise and a functioning system of the rule of law. The devil is in the detail of how to achieve positive results in all three (broadly) simultaneously. Which combinations and in which concentrations work best? Does it matter which version of the Rule of Law one uses? And is a good place to start looking for answers to both these questions the growing realisation of how serious is the problem of corruption and how dire is the need to find effective ways to combat it? This short paper explains the problems and possibilities that lie at the heart of asking and answering such questions.

I took the distance learning Postgraduate Diploma and MA at King’s College London during the academic years 2007/2009. My dissertation considered the interaction between public and private enforcement of the competition rules, and in particular the implications for private actions of alternative enforcement procedures – i.e. leniency programmes, commitments and settlement procedures. In the drafting of what would become Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions, this issue raised complex policy problems: the European Commission was, in principle, in favour of more private claims for damages, and did not want a system of settlements to render private actions more difficult. In 2009, this dissertation took part to the debate: it surveyed a range of evidential, procedural and substantive issues, and expressed opinions on how best to reconcile the settlements procedure and the position of claimants in civil litigation. In the first part, the dissertation analyses the context in which the studied interaction materializes by: underlining the main goals and characteristics of the three alternative enforcement procedures; emphasizing briefly the main goals and current issues of damages actions; presenting the key recommendations of the Commission White Paper; and assessing the tension between alternative enforcement procedures and . In the second part, the dissertation analyses and assesses the solutions offered by the Commission White Paper to find a balance between alternative enforcement procedures and private enforcement by: identifying the theoretical and practical obstacles to damages actions that alternative enforcement procedures imply; and assessing, in relation with alternative enforcement procedures, the solutions identified in the Commission White Paper. The proposed solutions were often insufficient to remove obstacles to the development of damages actions This research was presented and discussed with DG COMP and to university professors. Member States needed to implement Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions in their legal systems by 27 December 2016. In 2017, the impact of alternative enforcement procedures on damages actions is still being discussed and I have been asked to publish this dissertation to help feeding the reflexion of competition law specialists. I would be delighted if such was the case.

During the Bush II Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the federal agency charged with overseeing railroad safety, aggressively asserted the preemptive authority of its regulations, continuing to write broad preemption language into the preambles to its rules asserting that injured parties have no ability to seek compensation for their injuries or loss of loved ones, and even ignoring Congress’ attempt to amend the Federal Railroad Safety Act, the statute that governs federal railroad safety, to clarify that regulations issued under the statute are not intended to preempt state tort law.The white paper argues that the FRA should discontinue its efforts to preempt state tort law, explaining that a complementary system of federal regulatory standards and state common law is the best way to achieve railroad safety for passengers and railroad employees. In brief, it argues that a complementary tort system should be retained because:1. The FRA is a resource-starved agency unable to prevent accidents: State common law provides a backstop for the failure of the agency to adequately investigate accidents or enforce its regulations. 2. The FRA is captured by industry: Because the agency has placed so much responsibility with industry to regulate itself, the tort system is needed to serve as an independent monitor of industry’s activities to ensure they are undertaken with safety in mind.3. The FRA is unable to hold railroads accountable for improving safety: The agency relies on the railroad industry as a partner in doing its job, which hinders its ability to spur the railroad industry into taking appropriate measures to prevent railway accidents.4. State common law preserves corrective and protective justice: A person’s right to seek redress for harm inflicted on him or her should never be obliterated by federal preemptive power.The white paper concludes by offering various recommendations for how the FRA and Congress can each promote the complementary roles that federal regulation and state common law can play in ensuring greater railroad safety.

The present paper analyzes the interaction between the economic review of the probition of abuses of a dominant position (Article 82 EC) on the one hand and the efforts to enhance private enforcement of competition law through private damage claims on the other hand. The paper argues that effective enforcement requires that exactly those cases should be selected for decision which cause the type of negative welfare effects that Article 82 EC seeks to prevent. The author finds that public enforcers seek to repress unilateral business strategies causing harm to competition as protected by Article 82 EC. Private plaintiffs, by contrast, are motivated by the prospect of gaining damage awards which depends on their individual harm. The paper distinguishes several groups of private plaintiffs. For each, it is asked whether there is a correlation between individual harm and harm to competition. As it turns out, there is a divergence in the incentives of public enforcers as compared to certain potential private enforcers. In cases where there is harm to competition but no or only little individual harm there is concern for an under-deterrence through private enforcement. On the other hand, there are cases where private parties have an incentive to go to court even though there is no or little harm to competition. This might result in an over-deterrence. The paper concludes by discussing the consequences for reaching an optimum level of enforcement and the influence of a more economic understanding of Article 82 EC. A widely similar version of this paper has been published in: Mackenrodt, Mark-Oliver/Conde Gallego, Beatriz/Enchelmaier, Stefan (eds), Abuse of Dominant Position: New Interpretation, New Enforcement Mechanism? Springer 2008.

In December 2005 the European Commission published a Green Paper on Damages Actions for Breach of the EC Antitrust Rules. The Green Paper examines the conditions for bringing damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules and identifies obstacles to the current framework. Some of the options presented in the Green Paper that aim at facilitating private enforcement of EC competition law would require a certain level of harmonization of the national procedural rules governing EC antitrust damages actions. The objective of this working paper is to examine the competence of the EU to adopt such harmonizing measures. The paper will analyse, whether the Member States have a procedural autonomy when it comes to determining the procedural conditions governing rights conferred by Community law and the possible limitations to that autonomy. Moreover, it will examine possible legal bases for a harmonization, namely Articles 65, 83, 95 and 308 EC.

This short paper provides an overview of rights of first refusal (match rights) in merger agreements. Match rights are common in merger agreements, nearly universal. Even though these preemptive rights can be a strong economic deterrent to topping bids, there is little, if any, Delaware case law limiting their use. In fact, one recent chancery court decision endorsed the use of rights of first refusal in order to end an auction where Revlon duties applied. With the Toys r Us case as a backdrop, this paper will attempt to evaluate the competitive effects of rights of first refusal, specifically their impact on the deal premia, number of bidders and the prevalence of “deal jumping.” If the data provide evidence that rights of first refusal are anti-competitive, this paper will make arguments in favor of adopting a rule to limit reliance on match rights when Revlon duties apply.

The short paper talks about the mass human rights violations in the State of Chattisgarh in India by an armed group called the 'Salwa Judum'. Not surprisingly, this group is sponsored by the State gov. itself, and in the garb of solving the naxal menace is indulgin in HR violations. This paper explores the notion of the State Sponsored army and the implications of the same.

This article reviews the legal and economic structure of the class action litigation model in the United States, as set forth by rule 23 of US civil procedure, exploring the requirements for obtaining class certification and maintaining a class action. I analyse a number of critical issues and inefficiencies connected to the adoption of class action as a tool for adjudicating controversies. The article, then, takes into consideration the issue of private antitrust litigation in the European Union, at the moment still underdeveloped. A Green Paper recently published by the EU Commission includes proposals for the adoption of private antitrust damages litigation in the EU, but, even suggesting the possible adoption of a collective action model, never mentions class action as a viable solution. I consider some of the questions raised by the EU Commission in the Green Paper. Relying on the fact that US courts have repeatedly stated that antitrust controversies are suitable for class action treatment, I consider whether the US model of class action litigation might provide, although in an amended version, a satisfactory answer to the problematic issues raised by the Green Paper and represent an efficient tool for the private enforcement of antitrust law in the European Union.

Tort Law is not harmonised at a European level. Substantive and procedural regulations vary substantially across EU Member States in most of the facets and dimensions of damages actions. These differences derive, amongst other causes, from different legal traditions. However, significant efforts are being made in order to find common ground for the approximation or even harmonisation of these laws across the EU - building on the Principles of European Tort Law and other projects, such as the European Code of Civil Procedure. However, harmonisation of Tort Law and the corresponding Civil Procedure regulations is still open to debate and the process is envisaged to take a significant delay before any formal legal instruments are approved. Such regulatory diversity is inevitably reflected in the field of antitrust private enforcement-based on claims for harm inflicted as a result of the anticompetitive behaviour, which the European Commission is trying to encourage and promote as a key element of the modernisation process of the EC antitrust rules undertaken in 2003. In this regard, a Green Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules was published in December 2005 with the purpose of opening up a reform process that could facilitate private damages actions across the EU. Most remarkably, the Green Paper put forward most of the divergences in national Tort Law and Civil Procedure regulations that jeopardize the effectiveness of a privately enforced competition system. These differences in national regulations contrast with the nearly-full de facto harmonisation existing in antitrust law and its public enforcement. Consequently, the Commission proposed harmonisation alternatives that imply deep reforms in national Tort Law and Civil Procedure regulations. Those proposals are to be developed and further analysed in a forthcoming White Paper - foreseen to be adopted around the turn of the year 2007. At this stage, and before the Commission puts forward new harmonisation proposals, this paper analyses its need and adequacy and wonders whether the efforts of the Commission for the harmonisation of antitrust damages actions constitutes a backdoor harmonisation of fundamental aspects of Tort Law and Civil Procedure with much broader implications and effects in fields of Law other than antitrust.

This short paper (in French) structures some basic thoughts on the legitimacy of the European Union and the contribution of the (aborted) EU Constitution to close so-called legitimacy gaps in the EU governance process. It outlines the general context in which legitimacy issues arose in the EU and describes how the EU Constitution attempted to initiate a process of re-legitimization of the European Union. This paper served as an outline in preparing for the conference held in Brussels on February 16, 2005 at the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Olivaint Conference of Belgium.

Using a comprehensive database of closed claims maintained by the Texas Department of Insurance since 1988, this study provides evidence on a range of issues involving medical malpractice litigation, including claim frequency, payout amounts, defense costs, and jury verdicts. The data present a picture of stability in most aspects and moderate change in others. We do not find evidence in claim outcomes of the medical malpractice insurance crisis that produced headlines over the last several years and led to legal reform in Texas and other states. Controlling for population growth, the number of large paid claims (over $25,000 in real 1988 dollars) was roughly constant from 1990-2002. The number of smaller paid claims declined. Controlling for inflation, payout per large paid claim increased over 1988-2002 by an estimated 0.1 percent insignificant) -0.5 percent (marginally significant) per year, depending on the data set, but actual payouts in tried cases showed little or no time trend. Real defense costs per large paid claim rose by 4.2-4.5 percent per year. Real total cost per large paid claim, including defense costs, rose by 0.8-1.2 percent per year. The prior working paper version of this paper is available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=678601. The working paper version contains color figures, which were converted to black and white in the published version.

The laws of war have in the past decades been commonly referred to as international humanitarian law. Yet it is confusing and misleading to call this discipline “humanitarian law”. This short paper questions whether IHL is really humanitarian – after all, does IHL do more to restrain or to promote war? Is its offer of protection realistic? Or, to put it simply, is it part of the solution to war or rather part of the problem?

This short paper contains comments prepared for the 'Foundational Principles of Contract Law Roundtable’ held at Berkeley in January 2013. It discusses the relationships between contract law and democracy, between contract prices and human dignity, and between the American doctrine of unconscionability and the European doctrine of unfair exploitation contained in the proposed Common European Sales Law.

Portuguese Abstract: Este pequeno artigo analisa, de forma breve, a problematica da eficacia dos acordos parassociais, a luz do ordenamento juridico angolano.English Abstract: This short paper addresses the question of the effectiveness of shareholders' agreements, at the light of the Angolan law currently in force.

This paper responds in its first sections to a series of articles in which Rainer Schmalz-Bruns developed a concept of legitimate governance beyond the constitutional state, which he called 'deliberative supranationalism' and contrasted with what Jurgen Neyer and the present author had suggested under the same title. The Epilogue of the paper first comments on more recent critiques brought forward especially by contributors to this Special Issue of the ELJ and then on the programmatic rejection of comitology by the European Commission's White Paper on Governance in the EU. Our querelles allemandes were not specifically Teutonic: while Schmalz-Bruns presented his approach as a systematic elaboration of the theories of deliberative democracy, based, in particular, on recent contributions by Joshua Cohen, Michael Dorf, and Charles Sabel, Jurgen Neyer and I had offered an interpretation of institutional innovations and decision-making practices as observed in the European market-building project. This discussion has had precursors and follow-ups in various contexts, among both lawyers and political scientists. This essay should hence be understood as a contribution to an ongoing debate.

This is a short version of the full paper available at http://http://ssrn.com/abstract=2167417.There has been no systematic attempt to determine whether the patent doctrine of inequitable conduct is or is not working as theorized. This study fills that gap. We find that patents held unenforceable have clear hallmarks of risky prosecution behavior, such as longer pendency and fewer disclosures of prior art as compared to other types of litigated patents. The results indicate that the doctrine is likely to be operating better than the conventional wisdom would suggest.

This short paper was prepared as a supplement to a talk given by the author at the Prince Georges County Bar Association in Upper Marlboro, MD on March 31, 2012. Various developments in Maryland state law are discussed regarding character evidence, and impeachment of witnesses in court proceedings.

This white paper analyzes the contrast between the federal government’s representation of Secure Communities and the reality of the program’s implementation in Los Angeles County through interviews with individual immigrant detainees and available aggregate data. The interviews and data suggest that ICE’s failure to adhere to its own stated priorities is a feature rather than a reparable flaw of the program. The program has been constructed and implemented on the assumption that if an individual has any contact with law enforcement - even if that contact stems from a traffic offense - that individual represents a threat to the community. ICE uses its stated criminal priorities as part of a rhetorical strategy to assuage the concerns of states and localities. In operation, however, ICE casts a wide net and offers little relief to worthy candidates for prosecutorial discretion; the vast majority of those deported through Secure Communities have merely had contact with local law enforcement and have not committed serious crimes.

On 27 February 2011, the British Foreign Secretary declared that he had 'signed a directive revoking [Colonel Qadhafi' diplomatic immunity in the United Kingdom but also the diplomatic immunity of his sons, his family, his household so it's very clear where we stand on, on his status as a head of state.' This gave the impression that the United Kingdom no longer recognized Colonel Qadhafi as head of State of Libya and denied him diplomatic or personal immunity in the United Kingdom. His short paper examines the legal effects of a Direction pursuant to section 2'63) of the UK State Immunity Act 1978 and asks whether, in light of the death of hundreds of civilians and the incitement of hostility and violence against the civilian population by Colonel Qadhafi, the United Kingdom could, and should, withdraw his recognition as head of State of Libya and, consequently, deny him immunity.

The events in Libya have given rise to calls for the imposition of a no-fly zone over the country. There seems to be, however, neither the political will nor the necessary number of votes in the United Nations Security Council to authorize such a measure. This short paper examines whether States could request the International Court of Justice to indicate a no-fly zone over Libya as a provisional measure under Article 41 of the Court’s Statute and how such a provisional measures order by the Court could be enforced.

This white paper provides lawmakers and their staffs with a counterpoint to the Public Citizen Report and sets forth the case, grounded in empirical research, for why arbitration is a good deal for consumers.

This short paper argues that human rights remain an uncompleted part of the peace process despite the commitments contained in the Belfast Agreement. It focuses on the ongoing struggle of the families of those killed and injured in the events of Bloody Sunday to have the government commissioned Saville Report released without undue interference from government.

The Nigerian prisons are fast becoming an immense embarrassment and a national scandal. This short paper attempts to theoretically showcase not only; the extent to which the Nigerian Prison is more punitive than reformatory, but also, suggests measures to be put in place with a view to improving or reforming the prison system.

This is a submission to the European Commission in Response to to the Green Paper from the Commission on Policy Options for progress towards a European Contract Law COM (2010) 348 final. It challenges codification as a workable legislative technique for professional dealings in the 21st Century.

This white paper evaluates an assertion that is often made by proponents of judicial merit selection — i.e., that fewer unfit judges reach the bench through merit selection than through contestable elections — by comparing discipline rates for elected and merit-selected judges.

Discussions of bank capital regulation are often clouded by fundamental misunderstandings about how the insights presented over 50 years ago by Modigliani and Miller (M&M) relate to bank funding and the cost of bank equity. The claim is often made that banks are special and that the M&M insights do not apply in the banking context. This claim is misleading and false. The M&M insights, when properly interpreted, do apply to this discussion. These insights show that any analysis of capital regulation must be focused on how capital regulation rules affect the various frictions associated with funding and how this affects the social costs and benefits associated with the funding of banks. This short paper presents a parable that explains the relevance of M&M to banks and makes several observations about the errors and incorrect arguments that result when M&M insights are not properly recognized.

The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation may transfer factually related actions filed in different federal districts to a single judge for consolidated pretrial litigation. This transferee judge has significant discretion over the management of the litigation, and nearly all cases are resolved without returning to the original district court. Thus, as a practical matter, the Panel controls where these disputes will be litigated. And, the Panel has substantial discretion in making that decision. In its forty years of existence, the Panel has transferred roughly 325,000 lawsuits including high-profile securities and derivative lawsuits (the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the Ponzi scheme of Bernie Madoff), consumer claims (Countrywide Mortgage’s lending practices), and mass torts ranging from the Vioxx litigation to the Union Carbine disaster in Bhopal to the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. BP already has moved to consolidate and transfer more than 100 Gulf of Mexico oil spill suits filed against it in the various districts along the Gulf coast to the Southern District of Texas for pre-trial litigation, and potentially related suits filed in the future are likely to be transferred as well. The current study provides the first empirical investigation of the Panel’s decision to transfer and consolidate pending federal civil lawsuits, examining the rationale for transfer and for the selection of a specific district court and judge to handle the consolidated litigation. The results provided here represent a draft paper based on a sample from an ongoing data project which ultimately will include all Panel orders.

This white paper explores the relationship between judicial diversity and the institutional, political, and legal environment in which judges are selected.

This short paper is a response to Andrew Guzman's book, How International Law Works. Guzman presents a novel synthesis of the IR approaches to IL by arguing that a state's concern with its reputation is one most important source of compliance with international law. But the book's approach to reputation is not up to the task of explaining compliance. In discussion the book's shortcomings, I ask to whom the relevant reputation belongs. Guzman relies on notions of the state's reputation, but this assignment is a problem for a causation analysis because governments (who make the compliance decisions) will not fully internalize the state's reputation. In addition, I discuss the methodological problems in Guzman's approach. The book provides for only a very loose means of assessing reputational costs, even as a conceptual matter. Without such means of assessment, any claim about the power of reputation remains non-falsifiable and therefore has less theoretical force.