Search

The article reports that the Supreme Court overturned the Fifth Circuit's grant of qualified immunity to correctional officers in Taylor v. Riojas. Topics include medians several reforms such as increasing the number of magistrate judges; establishing a new specialty court and increasing the number of law school clinics.

Ten years ago the first version of the guiding document of the National Curriculum Guidelines (DCNs) was published, for the formation of bachelors in Journalism, and no longer in Social Communication. Almost simultaneously, the Supreme Court announced the end of the diploma requirement for professional practice. These apparently antagonistic facts impacted the demand for the course, the professional identity and the profile of the Brazilian journalist in the second decade of the third millennium. From the observation of the Undergraduate Conclusion Papers (TCCs), prepared by future bachelors in Journalism - and no longer in Social Communication, graduated at the Niterói campus of Estácio de Sá University, between 2014-2018, we sought to identify theoretical and perceptions of the changing professional identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyze an unusual legal development concerning brand protection in Thailand. The case study elucidates many key concepts in brand management and the political economy of Thailand. Design/methodology/approach: A case study approach is adopted, in which a chronology of key events surrounding a supreme court decision are developed. An analysis of the causes and consequences of the verdict is presented drawing on inputs from legal and business experts. Findings: The decision at the center of this case is ground breaking. Unlike conventional infringement decisions that are based on tangible designs of products, this case established protection of a brand image based on advertisements aired on television. It is argued that the decision went too far in the protection of trade dress and may potentially limit freedom and creativity for future marketing campaigns. Practical implications: Intellectual property protection in developing economies such as in Thailand can be complicated by a lack of clear laws and the political and social influence of the parties involved. Originality/value: The case provides the first analysis of a potentially consequential supreme court decision with links to the unique context of the political economy of Thailand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marked by the killing of a senior ICT professional working for the Electoral Commission and the invalidation of the presidential election by the Supreme Court, the 2017 Kenyan elections make for a good case through which to study how digital technologies shape contemporary electoral practice. This article examines the practice of electoral transparency through technology and argues that it can be conceived as a socio-technical device based both on distancing people from knowledge of the electoral infrastructure and on staging a simplified discourse on public access to the electoral infrastructure. Drawing on interviews with key actors in election technology implementation and ethnographic observations of public events around it, the article argues that digital technology has had three sets of implications for elections. First, it has shaped the electoral infrastructure and the nature of the final result (now a paper and digital hybrid). Second, it has shaped the distribution of knowledge among electoral professionals, giving a central role to ICT actors, objects, and knowledge in the definition of electoral transparency. Third, the centrality of ICTs in elections and the order of knowledge they bring are highly controversial and criticized by other electoral actors who demand for material proof for understanding the inner workings of elections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contract lawyers are often divided between two schools of thought: formalism and contextualism. In the realm of contractual interpretation, this division illuminates various debates surrounding the modern contextual approach. Ultimately, however, the divide between the 'real and the paper deal' does not fully reflect the relevant fault lines. The real contest is between rival interpretations attempting to make the most coherent sense of the available text and context surrounding the document. In characterising the true nature of the exercise, I draw upon theories of coherence to articulate a framework of 'contextual coherence' that involves concepts of competing narratives, the rational motivations of the parties, and the need for a holistic assessment of the best hypothesis, in accordance with the English courts' 'iterative approach' to interpretation. I demonstrate that this framework enables us to explain and evaluate recent cases such as the UK Supreme Court decision of Arnold v Britton. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American Founders worked tirelessly to end the lack of representation colonists had faced under British rule. The Constitution requires that each state be apportioned a proportional number of representatives in the House of Representatives. Throughout the first 120 years of the nation's history, the size of the House increased in proportion to population. Though population continued to grow exponentially, the Apportionment Act of 1911 limited the House to 435 representatives. One hundred years later, the population has increased by nearly 220 million, but the number of representatives in the House remains stunted at 435. This mismatched growth and stiltedness results in greatly disparate representation in the federal government between residents of neighboring states, as well as inaccurate outcomes in federal elections. This Note argues that the Founders' goal of proportionality in representation should be striven for in four ways. First, repealing the limit on representatives in the Apportionment Act of 1911 should be accompanied by a new formula for determining the number of representatives apportioned to each state that resembles the formula used in other western countries. Second, we should change the formula for determining how many representatives each state will receive to a method previously used, which lacks all bias. The second two changes I propose are geared towards fairer presidential elections. First, each state should elect to split Electoral College votes in order to better represent the choices of the electorate. Second, the Twelfth Amendment requirement that in the event of no Electoral College winner the vote must go to the House should be repealed. Enacting these changes will result in a better represented electorate, which will more closely resemble the Founders' vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many scholars of the Supreme Court and many justices assert the importance of the Federalist Papers. They provide important evidence of original meaning and interpretation of the Constitution, and there is evidence that there is an increase in citations to the Federalist Papers in Supreme Court opinions. While some may view this increased citation use as a positive development because it demonstrates reliance on legal authority in judicial decisions, we provide evidence that in a period marked by dissensus and controversy, the use of the Federalist Papers represents externally and internally oriented strategic attempts by the justices to add legitimacy to constitutional interpretation, and to sway colleagues. We use a combination of descriptive and multivariate techniques to examine Federalist citations from 1953 to 1995 to demonstrate our interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article deals with reflections on the role of the plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic as regards its competence to guarantee the consistency of the case law. At the same time, the article represents a polemic review of the monograph of O. Kadlec on the role of grand chambers at the supreme courts. The author of the article, who worked in various positions at the Constitutional Court (legal assistant, head of the analytical department, secretary general), acknowledges the conclusions of the monograph that the plenum obtained extensive powers and high expectations which cannot be satisfied in practice. This is due both to the composition of the plenum, which incorporates all 15 judges of the Constitutional Court, and to the fact that the plenum is authorized not only to guarantee the consistency of the case law of the Constitutional Court's senates, but -- and above all -- to decide in the proceedings concerning the judicial review of legal norms. Therefore, making the case law of senates consistent has been considered secondary and less important. The author tries to examine other causes of this situation and considers possible solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the legendary decision of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. Apart from this, the author’s aim is to analyse the constitutional interpretation done by the Higher Judiciary of the Country. Another aim of this note is to simplify the decision of this case for the understanding of the mass people and law students.Design/methodology/approach To conclude this paper, both qualitative and analytical methods have been used.Findings In this paper, a summarized fact of the case has been presented. In addition to that, decision of the High Court Division in the Writ petition has been simplified with six simple points. Moreover, major arguments submitted by both the Appellant’s and Respondent’s Lawyers have been summarized. Decision of the Appellate Division has been simplified with 12 simple points along with the reasoning behind the judgement.Research limitations/implications In this paper, only the case of Secretary, Ministry of Finance vs Md. Masdar Hossain and Others has been studied and analysed in depth.Practical implications This paper will mainly help the Law and Social Science students for simply understanding the decision and the reasoning behind the decision of the case. Apart from that, this case noting will help both academics and legal professionals to study this case within a short period.Social implications This paper will help mass people who want to study about this case to simply understand the case in depth. In addition to that, people will get known about the procedure hoe the subordinate judiciary of Bangladesh became independent.Originality/value This conceptual paper is the original piece of work and is not under review in any other journal. This paper has not been published previously in any other journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent decision of R v Bradshaw presents the latest chapter in the Supreme Court's principled approach to hearsay admissibility. In Bradshaw, the Supreme Court placed several limits on the use of corroborative evidence within the principled approach. While this alone is perhaps unobjectionable, the decision's lack of clarity and technical complexity has resulted in a great deal of uncertainty. In particular, several key questions relating to the Bradshaw framework remained unanswered following the Supreme Court's decision. This paper looks to the post-Bradshaw case law to unravel this uncertainty. Ultimately, however, it concludes that the questions presented by Bradshaw remain largely unanswered. Despite several courts' attempts to solve the issues left unresolved by Bradshaw, there is little consensus amongst the lower courts. In light of this continued uncertainty, this paper argues that the Bradshaw framework requires some clarifications. Sound policy considerations support the Bradshaw test, but to be truly useful, several key questions must be answered when the Supreme Court revisits the issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In June 21, 1990, the Joneses, an African-American family living in the mainly white and working-class neighbourhood of St. Paul in Minnesota, saw a small white cross burning in their yard. By placing the burning cross on the yard, the Minnesota Supreme Court argued that one of the accused, Robert A Viktora, had engaged in 'fighting words'. However, the US Supreme Court reversed this decision, arguing that the local authority in St Paul only legally banned certain 'fighting words', but not others. Judith Butler explores this legal case, R.A.V. v. St. Paul. Judith Butler argues in her earlier work that the Supreme Court in effect represented the burning cross as being non-performative and simply a vehicle of expression rather than a historical symbol of hate speech towards African-Americans. In this paper, I look again at the R.A.V. case. But I do so by both drawing on what Butler explicitly says about the case in her early work and integrating this with her later work on the ethics of grief, state hegemony and public assemblies. Furthermore, I also incorporate some of the insights of the Bakhtin Circle into Butler's work to strengthen her arguments. The paper then revisits R.A.V. v. St. Paul and shows how Reaganite state hegemony effectively transformed issues of racism surrounding this free speech case into 'monologic' and 'ungrievable' public matters of concern. The paper concludes by briefly discussing counter-hegemonic politics of free speech. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's 2023 decision to effectively end race-conscious admissions practices across the nation, this paper highlights the law's commitment to whiteness and antiblackness, invites us to mourn and to connect to possibility. Design/methodology/approach: Drawing from the theoretical contributions of Cheryl Harris, Jarvis Givens and Chezare Warren, as well as the wisdom of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissenting opinion, this paper utilizes CRT composite counterstory methodology to illuminate the antiblack reality of facially "race-neutral" admissions. Findings: By manifesting the impossible situation that SFFA and the Supreme Court's majority seek to normalize, the composite counterstory illuminates how Justice Jackson's hypothetical enacts a fugitive pedagogy within a dominant legal system committed to whiteness as property; invites us to mourn, to connect to possibility and to remain committed to freedom as an intergenerational project that is inherently humanizing. Originality/value: In a sobering moment where we face the end of race-conscious admissions, this paper uniquely grapples with the contradictions of affirmative action as minimally effective while also radically disruptive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores an urban squat in Ljubljana, Slovenia, following a chronotopic narrative approach. Urban squats often represent a manifestation of alternative notions of who belongs where, when, and why, questions that matter when issues pertaining to their legal status are raised. We examine the case of Autonomous Rog, a formerly squatted bike factory area in the city centre of Ljubljana that the Supreme Court of Slovenia described as "quasi-public." The paper welcomes the Slovenian Supreme Court's ability to appreciate the social, spatiotemporal, and material elements that make up this idiotropic type of urban space, moving beyond the confines of human-centred legal analysis. We present the journey of Autonomous Rog through three distinctive chronotopic viewpoints, in order to accentuate the subversive human and material properties that found their way into the Slovenian legal system, as we reflect on the law's ability to embrace spatiotemporal representations in an urban context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appeal is one of the procedures found in the statute relating to the Mal procedure in the Syariah Court in all the states in Malaysia. Appeal procedures are established for the aggrieved parties by court decision. However, to the extent of the difference in jurisdiction to hear appeals in the syariah Court and whether it is in accordance to hukum syarak that such appeal be heard, should be discussed and analyzed. This paper explains the differencet jurisdiction of the court to hear appeals and to analyze the provisions of the appeal procedure in the Mal Procedure Enactment, accordance with Hukum syarak This paper uses pure literature and legal research methods to collect data to be analyzed using content analysis methods. The study shows that there are differences in the jurisdiction to hear appeals of the Syariah High Court and the Syariah Court of Appeal in the administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 and the Syariah Court (Perak) enactment 2018. Every appeal procedure in the Enactment of the Mal procedure in the Syariah Court is based on hukum syarak. This paper also highlights the importance of understanding the courts 'jurisdiction of hearing appeals and basis of hukum syarak for each appeal procedure to all Shariah law practitioners in Malaysia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper first analyses recent legislative restructuring of higher courts in Croatia that has limited access to the said courts and their procedural powers. The initiatives for divesting appellate courts and the Supreme Court of their case-law harmonisation powers have been discussed, as well as the character of section meeting opinions that are legally binding on judges of the section concerned, which allegedly raise questions as to the incompatibility with the right to an independent court established by law. This discussion includes the views of AG Pikamäe expressed in the pending case C-554/21 et al. (HANN-INVEST). The paper also reviews legislative interventions in the procedure for appointment of the President of the Supreme Court and a failed attempt to introduce periodic security vetting of all judges with special quasi-disciplinary chamber of the Supreme Court. These processes are then explained by law and economics models of de iure and de facto judicial independence and constitutional arrangements, applied to the case-law of the ECtHR, the CJEU and the Croatian Constitutional Court. The paper concludes that the Croatian legislature has undermined de iure and de facto judicial independence of Croatia's higher courts. On the other hand, the Croatian Constitutional Court has been observing both formal and informal factors of judicial independence and has thus established that: 1. no constitutional or legal check against the executive's interference with independence of the judiciary should be dismantled or construed narrowly, no matter how hypothetical de iure independence of judges may appear; 2. no abstract aspect of the principle of judicial independence may run counter practical and effective enjoyment of individual right to a non-arbitrary judge or the principles of lawfulness and proper administration of justice. It has been inferred from the law and economics model that the Supreme Court has become the most important institutional actor of judicial independence in Croatia and therefore legislative restructuring of the said court should be put to an end. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Basic Structure Doctrine, developed by the Supreme Court of India to protect the Constitution of India 1950 from undesirable amendments by Parliament, has seen tremendous growth in its 51 years of existence. This paper argues that despite its evolving scope, the doctrine suffers from an abstraction problem: it insufficiently addresses the abstraction level at which basic features should be identified. The judicial techniques employed to identify these features also do not adequately address this problem. A review of the Supreme Court’s application of the doctrine in cases involving a basic structure challenge to constitutional amendments reveals that basic features have been identified at varying abstraction levels. Consequently, this paper proposes a “stratification test” that categorizes the Constitution’s basic features and the facets of these features as two distinct abstraction levels. It argues that recognizing and stratifying varying abstraction levels is essential for effective constitutional dialogue, experimentation, and governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Públic is the property of Revista Catalana de Dret Public and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Chilena de Derecho Privado is the property of Fundacion Fernando Fueyo Laneri and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Supreme Court of Pakistan plays an important mediatory role in managing political conflict. While there is a growing body of literature on the merits of the Eighteenth Amendment to Pakistan's Constitution, not much has been written about how those changes have actually played out in practice before the courts. This paper tries to plug this gap by critically examining the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd v Federation of Pakistan. This paper argues that while the outcome is consistent with a general tendency of constitutional courts to centralize power, the expansive rule laid down by the Supreme Court does not square up with the spirit of the Eighteenth Amendment which was intended to resolve long-standing disputes between the centre and the provinces by conferring greater provincial autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the flaws in the institutional construction of the external supervision of the Minister of Justice over the administrative activity of common courts. The main research method used in the study was a comparative analysis of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, laws and other legal acts. The paper presents the supreme supervision of the Minister of Justice over the administrative activity of common courts introduced by the legislator, which compromises the independence of judges asymmetrically to the efficiency of the judiciary. The institutional construction of the supreme supervision of common courts equips the Minister of Justice with arbitrary and discretionary authority over the administrative activities of the courts, which violates the constitutional principle of the tripartite division of power. The problem of institutional construction and the balancing of powers from the perspective of the Constitution is extremely important. The first doubt is shown in Article 183(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland that the Supreme Court supervises the activities of the common and military courts in the field of adjudication. Thus, in principle, the question of supervision of jurisdictional activities is clarified, whereas there is no explicitly expressed supervision of judicial administration in the Constitution. Nevertheless, such supervision is necessary, since the court is the disposer of budgetary funds, movable and immovable property, in matters of economic administration such supervision is necessary from the point of view of legality, economy, expediency and reliability. First of all, this study indicates what the administrative activity of common courts is. Then, the evolution of the external supervision of the Minister of Justice over the administrative activity of common courts is presented. In the next part of the paper, the Constitutional prerequisites for excessive interference in the independence of common courts are shown. In the final part, the urgent need for reform in the area of the Minister of Justice's external supervision over the administrative activity of common courts is indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reforms to judicial elections follow a common framework: alter who has the legal authority to hold judges accountable (through selection, a subsequent election, or both) with the goal of enhancing judicial independence and increasing the odds of selecting competent jurists. New waves of reform occur when adjustments to the previous accountability mechanism no longer produce the expected independence or competence. Reformers have followed this framework in three waves of reform. The first wave of judicial election reform started in the 1840s and made judges accountable to the people via partisan elections rather than to the legislative or executive branches previously tasked with appointing and reappointing judges. The second wave replaced partisan elections with nonpartisan elections. The third wave spread versions of the Missouri Plan--the initial appointment of judges by the legislative branch, executive branch, or a process that involves both branches followed by a retention election in which voters decide only whether the judge should serve another term. A fourth wave is necessary but has not formed. Public concerns about the legitimacy of state supreme courts continue to mount as judicial elections become increasingly competitive, producing judicial candidates less juridically competent than politically competent, accountable to special interests rather than the people, and dependent on those special interests rather than the law and facts at issue. Despite these concerns, the people have not supported the most obvious reform: the elimination of judicial elections. Moreover, the people seem willing to reject this reform for the foreseeable future. Restoration of judicial independence and competence must come from another source. This paper argues that courts themselves have an underused practice at their disposal that can help maintain and enhance judicial independence and result in more competent jurists ending up on the bench. More specifically, this paper explores how the use of By-the-Court opinions by courts of last resort in states with retention elections can initiate the long-awaited fourth wave of judicial election reform. A state using the By-the-Court approach to opinion delivery would issue a single, anonymous opinion akin to a per curiam opinion, written by a "ghost justice"--a permanent clerk who serves as a ghostwriter for the entire court and drafts their opinions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A content analysis of the editorial pages of the Birmingham News from 1960 to 1964 shows that, despite its staunch segregationist stance, the paper's editorial pages, nonetheless, produced strong integrationist narratives. This paradox was borne of discordant interpretations of 14th Amendment rights featured in the Supreme Court's Plessy (1896) and Brown (1954) decisions. Rise of staunch segregationist groups and officials after the Court's 1954 Brown decision drove News editors to embrace greater democratic pluralism. The evolution in editorial approach corresponded to the paper's gradual adoption of Brown's interpretations of 14th Amendment rights. Change in the valence of the paper's narratives supports Condit's (1987) thesis that rhetorical "crafting" of public morality about race brought about greater tolerance and acceptance of racial equality in America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper systematizes and compares, based on the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court and its decisions, four pairings of concepts that arise from discussions on the operability of the presumption of innocence in the AngloAmerican legal system. The article illustrates that the partial conclusions in each of these comparisons must be reached by arguments consistent with the normative foundation of the presumption of innocence principle in order to find the defining characteristics of said principle. Ultimately, the paper sets forth a definition of the presumption of innocence that encompasses each of the partial conclusions thus reached. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 1 August 2002, the Allahabad High Court in India, adjudicating the Ayodhya Case, ordered archaeological excavations by the central government agency Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) at the site of the demolished mosque Babri Masjid in Uttar Pradesh. The order marked a new moment for the convergence of law and archaeology in India, with archaeological knowledge being produced on judicial demand as evidence in a civil dispute. This paper argues that this marked the emergence of a hybrid episteme of archaeology-as-legal-evidence which redefines archaeology within the framework of law. It traces these tendencies by a close reading of three documents: the judgements of the Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya Case and an order issued by a lower court in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh on 8 April 2021 in the GyanVapi Case. I argue that the new role that archaeology is assuming in courtrooms in India is destabilising the standing of the ASI as the authority of archaeological knowledge and the protector of the nation's material past. It has also produced a category of assertive public that successfully demands production of archaeological knowledge towards ideological ends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Review of Contract Law is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

For 49 years, the right to abortion was taken for granted—inhaled by every girl, every woman—by all people assigned female at birth in the United States. This right no longer exists. In 2022, with the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, the Supreme Court removed federal protection for the legal right to abortion and therefore women's agency over their bodies. This paper will contextualize abortion as part of a continuum that encompasses gender, motherhood and the meaning of reproduction and reproductive rights as sociocultural and intrapsychic phenomena. The expectation that mature female-bodied people are child-desiring women persists and is not conceptualized as optional. It is the original choice women do not have. The next choice women no longer have, if they become pregnant, is whether or not to continue a pregnancy. The Dobbs decision means the cultural reinstatement of female de-sexualization, along with the suffocating and silencing of agency—a negation of women's voices, desire, power and subjectivity—a recipe for psychological destabilization. Personal and clinical material will illustrate these points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2014, the Indian Supreme Court passed the landmark NALSA v. Union of India judgment that not only granted transgender persons the right to self-identify their gender but also recognized their right to equitable and accessible education. Further, in 2018, the apex court passed another landmark judgment in the case of Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India , reading down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, and, therefore, decriminalizing consensual adult homosexual sex acts. In the backdrop of these landmark judgments – i.e. in post-NALSA and post-377 India – identity and community questions pertaining to transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary persons' access to and presence in educational institutions in India have intensified. Focusing on science institutions, this paper attempts to delineate the ways in which proximal and distal networks of caste-class and gender shape transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary persons' exclusion from and belonging in science collectivities. Further, this paper also investigates how transgender persons' sense of belonging to certain communities speaks to their shifting epistemic dispositions. Finally, contextualizing transpersons' negotiations in science communities and individual and collective scales as 'unstable and hybrid assemblages', this paper demonstrates the ways in which trans collectives in science institutions radicalize community building and development in these institutional spaces by interrupting dominant institutional cultures and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Crítica de Relaciones de Trabajo, Laborum is the property of Ediciones Laborum S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Law & Society/Revue Canadienne Droit et Societe (Cambridge University Press) is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)