Search

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental is the property of Universitat Rovira I Virgili 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.)

Opponents of the administrative state have chosen doctrine, not legislation, as their preferred tool to restructure administrative governance in the United States. As a result, courts may soon decide that the nondelegation doctrine is insufficiently robust. While the justification for giving teeth to the nondelegation doctrine typically rests on trying to democratize the administrative state or to encourage Congress to speak more precisely, creating a robust nondelegation doctrine would, however, only empower the courts at Congress's expense. This Article argues that making a robust nondelegation doctrine would be an example of judicial self-aggrandizement. To explain why the Supreme Court would only be empowering itself, this Article describes judicial aggrandizement and argues that it is best understood as a type of institutional change motivated by ideas. Drawing on original research on William Howard Taft and his decision in J.W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United States, this Article demonstrates that ideas about judicial empowerment structured the initial shifts from a separation-of-powers system into a separation-of-powers doctrine that courts must enforce. Taft successfully used Supreme Court decisions to aggrandize the Supreme Court and the judiciary as a whole. The same ideas continue to structure the courts' role in the constitutional system. Creating a robust nondelegation doctrine requires endorsing the same ideas and further entrenching the Supreme Court as the final arbiter over core questions of constitutional self-governance. A robust nondelegation doctrine would be yet another example of judicial self-aggrandizement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Computer und Recht 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.)

Copyright of Computer und Recht 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.)

This Viewpoint breaks down the myriad ways the Alabama Supreme Court decision to declare frozen embryos as legal equivalents to children harms the health of mothers and fetuses, limits reproductive decision-making based on genetics and out-of-reach costs, and impedes research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), however, reversed the decision and upheld immunity ( I Basfar v. Wong (Diplomatic Immunity) i , [2020] UKEAT/0223/19/BA). The employment tribunal rejected Basfar's plea of diplomatic immunity on the ground that Wong's claim came within the "commercial activity" exception. 1. On 6 July 2022, the UK Supreme Court, by a majority of 3:2, rendered a judgment in I Basfar v. Wong i ( I Basfar v. Wong i , [2022] UKSC 20). [Extracted from the article]

This Note clarifies the core finding of the Supreme Court, explains why it does not pose the threat to press freedom some media commentary has alleged, and addresses two issues arising from the complex relationship between confidentiality and privacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The significance of the Supreme Court decision in ZXC v Bloomberg extends well beyond recognition of the 'starting point' that, up to the point of charge, a person who is subject to police investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of information about it. The Supreme Court's willingness to use the privacy tort to protect a claimant's reputational interests (based largely on European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence) moves the misuse of private information action firmly into defamation's domain. This article examines the potential ramifications of the change in relationship between the two actions and shows how measures like the new exception for foreseeable loss of reputation (recognised in ZXC itself) can help preserve essential protections for true, but reputationally-damaging, allegations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article draws on an artificial intelligence (AI) technique to predict whether an individual application regarding the Turkish Constitutional Court's public morality and freedom of expression cases leding to a "violation" or a "nonviolation" decision. To this end, four different data sets have been composed, preclassification and fundamental word embeddings steps have been made on each data set. Multilayer perceptron, which is based on artificial neural networks, has been used for the prediction of the case decisions. We have predicted the court's decisions on these cases with the high success rates (average accuracy of 90%) by using the subject or reasoning sections of texts of the cases as data. The subject section of the cases constituting only a very small part of the data has yielded the highest accuracy. The article has demonstrated that a basic AI technique can be successful in achieving accurate predictions even with relatively small data sets derived from well-structured court rulings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Sakarya University Journal of Law Faculty (SHD) is the property of Sakarya University Journal of Law Faculty (SHD) 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 Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd 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.)

This study presents the conditions for maintaining the tenure of teachers who have to retire and for the reinstatement or continuation of employment of retired teachers, as they emerge from the analysis, not simple and necessarily in its entirety, of the provisions of S. 289 of Law no. 1/2011 on national education, of which only those of paragraphs (1), (3), (6) and (7) are still applicable. Especially in the light of the new form of paragraph (7) introduced by item 37 of Article I of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 117/2013 due to the fact that, as noted in its explanatory memorandum, by Constitutional Court Decision no. 397/2013, the previous form of this paragraph was declared unconstitutional. The analysis of this decision is conclusive from the perspective of the teleological method of interpretation, which together with the logical, historical, systematic and grammatical method helps us in our legal research to provide solutions; each university had/has to transpose the provisions which are difficult to interpret into a methodology approved by the university senate, providing for the other legal and procedural conditions. The study is also important from the perspective of the new draft of the higher education law which seems to omit the criticisms and conclusions of the Constitutional Court referred to above. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Antalya Bilim University Law Review is the property of Antalya International University 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 de Derecho de la Seguridad Social, 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.)

The European Union requires its Member States to fulfil their commitments stemming from the membership in the EU responsibly and to assist in carrying out tasks flowing from the Treaties and to achieve the Union's objectives in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation. This scientific thesis points out the responsibility of Member States to fulfil their obligations in bona fide in accordance with principle pacta sunt servanda and it refers to well established case law of the Court of Justice of the EU clarifying the application primacy of EU law over national laws. At the same time it opens the discussion about decisions of constitutional courts related to the primacy of EU law in some EU Member States, in particular in Germany and Poland. This scientific thesis points out the significance of EU law in the process of further deepening of European integration and promoting rule of law values common to the EU Member States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.)

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.)

In recent years, media commentators have expressed concern about the Constitutional Court of South Africa's lengthening judgment processing times. We conduct a comprehensive statistical study to assess this trend and identify its causes. Our period of study is 2010 to 2021, which encompasses the tenure of recently retired Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng. We find that the Court's average processing time has almost exactly doubled over this 12-year period. We then discuss various possible explanations for the upward trend: first, an increase in the Court's workload; second, the Covid-19 pandemic; third, the Court's declining capacity due to vacancies and absenteeism; and fourth, a change in the extent of unanimity in its opinions. Our study confirms that the first factor, widely invoked in the media, has likely played a significant role. Critically, however, we argue that the third factor, though more rarely acknowledged, is also significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses the judgment of Froneman J in National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Nganezi v Dunlop Mixing and Technical Services (Pty) Ltd [2019] ZACC 25 ('Dunlop'), dealing with the contentious labour law doctrine of derivative misconduct. We consider the lack of uniformity in the evolution of the doctrine since its genesis in 1994, and consequently, the issues that Froneman J sought to clarify in the Dunlop judgment. The Dunlop matter was the Constitutional Court's first opportunity to adjudicate on derivative misconduct, which came into play in the context of strike action. Due to the varying interpretations and the lack of precedential certainty, the Court's voice on the matter was eagerly anticipated. Froneman J clarified general principles relating to derivative misconduct that were misconceived in previous judgments (as well as courts a quo in Dunlop), including the distinction between the primary and derivative misconduct, and the importance of reciprocal good faith obligations in the generically unequal employment relationship. In terms of the latter, the Court set an important standard in favour of striking employees by highlighting the fundamental role of employee solidarity in strike action and disposing of the duty to 'rat' with no reciprocal obligation on the part of the employer. We critically engage with the judgment and its implications for the right to strike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A law professors' global conversation on 'progressive property' confirms institutions of private ownership as foundational for individual human freedom and dignity, while also insisting on the design of such institutions with a view, grounded in the principle of the equal value of every person, to the ability of each person to access and enjoy these values of the institution of property. The conversation takes as a premise that a design for a good and just system of property entitlements is not deducible from any single metric but rather falls unavoidably to political judgment and choice. That does not mean, though, impulsive choice, but rather choice through the exercise of deliberative reason and critical judgment leavened by tradition and experience. This article seeks illumination of the progressive-property paradigm through a consideration of three judgments from Associate Justice Johan Froneman, in cases before the Constitutional Court of South Africa on property under that country's constitution. The discussion takes its turn towards what it names as a pragmatist strain in our received traditions of political argument - finding in the judicial work of Froneman J, as represented in these judgments, characteristics of realism, contextualism, a mediation of functional and formal demands on adjudication under a rule of law, and an optimistic outlook on the possibility of political practical reason. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pravnik is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law 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 ruling of July 27, 2022 resolves an appeal filed by the State Administration against a judgment of the National Court. The main issue is to determine whether the state's competence in granting subsidies to third sector entities and non-governmental organizations in the field of scientific and technical environmental research respects the established competence framework. The Supreme Court accepts the arguments of the Government of Catalonia and declares the appeal filed by the State Administration to be unfounded. The judgment is based on the analysis of Order 1433/2016 and concludes that its predominant subject matter is the environment. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd 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 obligation of telecommunications network operators to retain traffic and location data had already been known to the Czech legal system before the infamous data retention directive came into force. The original data retention legislation was even repealed by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic before the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, popularly called Digital Rights Ireland. However, the new version of the legislation was reviewed again by the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, but this time the legislation was found to be in line with the constitutional order. However, the question remains whether the Czech legislation is compatible with EU law, as the CJEU has already given some guidance in several cases on the admissibility of the nationwide retention of telecommunications metadata. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Europarecht (05312485) is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG 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 article examines the 2019 judgment of the Constitutional Court of Russia concerning the right to compensation of housing and right to return of the children of the victims deported by the Soviet state to the gulag or exile. Despite the favourable judgment of the Constitutional Court, the right to remedy for the victims was still unattainable. The article examines why this was the case by drawing on the absence of internal and external coherence of reparations programmes, the approach to reparations throughout history in the Soviet Union and Russia, the Law on Rehabilitation and other factors that rendered the reparations unobtainable. The article argues that in the absence of holistic transitional justice measures and accountability for crimes, separate laws and court judgments have been unable to deliver justice, resulting in a long, cumbersome and often humiliating and fruitless process for victims attempting to claim their rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pravnik is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law 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 process of examining pretrial applications, through Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2016, is determined to only seek formal truth. Therefore, the Pretrial Sole Judge is required to only examine the formal requirements of legal action as a coercive measure as stipulated in the pretrial object in Article 77 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, prior to the emergence of the provisions of the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court through Decision Number 21/PUU-XIII/2014 has expanded the object of pretrial not only those contained in the decision but through legal considerations. This study aims to find an extension of the paradigm in determining procedural law in examining pretrial applications. This study uses legal research methods through literature study. The results of this study indicate that there are two pretrial object models that shift the paradigm in the process of examining pretrial applications from a quasi-civil procedure law with the search for the formal truth, to a quasi-criminal procedure law with the search for material truth, through the establishment of the Prudential Principle and Subjective Action as the object of a pretrial application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health ended the federal right to an abortion, first pronounced in the 1973 case Roe v. Wade. Dobbs has immediate implications for American women, but it also exposes a growing hostility by the court to the doctrine of 'substantive due process' on which many other federal rights rely. This article argues that the court's weakening of substantive due process is a direct challenge to the constitutional transformation wrought by the Fourteenth Amendment following the Civil War. The amendment asserted a national standard of fundamental rights, profoundly rebalancing power away from the states. Should the Supreme Court extend the logic of Dobbs, the national basis for many substantive due process rights will be removed. The court is reviving a kind of states' rights constitutional thinking hitherto unseen by the current generation of Americans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Supreme Court Judgment of July 21, 2022 resolves an appeal filed by the Association of Producers and Users of Electric Energy (APUEE) against the Management Plan of the river basin district of Catalonia. The Supreme Court determines whether the hydrological plan can establish a regime of ecological flows before carrying out the negotiation and revision of the affected concessions. The Association argues that the implementation of ecological flows should be conditioned to the negotiation and revision of the concession titles, while the Government of Catalonia maintains that it is not necessary. The Supreme Court rejects the arguments of the Association and confirms the judgment. The article deals with the obligation to respect the maintenance flows in water concessions in Catalonia. According to the Government of Catalonia, these flows must be applied without the need to revise the concession title. It is established that concessionaires must negotiate with the Public Administration to assess whether compliance with the new flows allows maintaining a balance between environmental objectives and productive interests. Furthermore, it is emphasized that the ecological flow is a general restriction imposed by the Water Law and is not considered a use. The appealed judgment does not misinterpret the articles related to this issue. Judgment STS 3196/2022 of the Supreme Court modifies the jurisprudence on compensation for water concession holders affected by the obligation to maintain certain flows determined by hydrological planning. According to the judgment, not only is there a right to compensation in the event of a concession revision, but also if damages and losses caused by the imposition of new ecological flows are proven. However, it must be demonstrated that the maintenance flows have been complied with and that the requirements for patrimonial liability are met. The judgment also establishes that ecological flows are a general burden that all concession holders must respect. [Extracted from the article]

The Supreme Court Judgment of July 21, 2022 resolves an appeal filed by the City Council of Santa Cruz de Tenerife against a sentence that declared the nullity of the municipal ordinance on the urban landscape of the city. The Supreme Court determines that the report from the Ministry of Industry, Energy, and Tourism is mandatory for the approval of a municipal ordinance regulating material aspects related to the urban landscape. The Judgment establishes that the report from the Ministry of Industry, Energy, and Tourism is mandatory for the approval of a municipal ordinance on aspects of the urban landscape. However, the omission of the report would only affect provisions related to telecommunications. [Extracted from the article]

The Constitutional Court has declared unconstitutional the provisions of the Hunting Law of Castilla y León related to wolf hunting. The inclusion of all wolf populations in the List of Wild Species under Special Protection (LESRPE) prohibits their hunting, contradicting the regional law that considered the wolf as a game species. Spain is obliged to protect wolf populations south of the Duero River, while those in the north may be subject to management measures. Order TED 980/2021 has been declared unconstitutional in relation to wolf hunting, generating controversy and allegations of lack of legal certainty. The article analyzes complaints about the dilution of the concept of "materially basic" in the environmental legal field and the importance of interpreting norms considering the material object and the consequences of the norm. The situation in Spain is also compared to that of Germany, where tensions exist between federal and regional laws regarding wolf protection. Additionally, information is provided on the application of the Hunting Law in Castilla y León and wolf protection in Germany and Sweden, and the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Tapiola case is mentioned. The article provides bibliographic references related to constitutional law and environmental law that may be useful for those researching these specific topics. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Ankara Barosu Dergileri is the property of Ankara Bar Association 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 Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd 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 Administrative Court in the commented judgment unfortunately made an unsuccessful attempt to carry out the Ástráðsson test with regard to a person appointed by the President at the request of a politically subordinate (in violation of the Constitution) National Council of the Judiciary. Failure to do so is a kind of paradox of the commented judgment. A significant part of it relates to supranational and international law. „Europeanness” is ubiquitous in the judgment and was additionally included in its thesis. According to its content, assessors and judges are European judges. However, this otherwise catchy statement is not confirmed by the application of the judgment of the ECtHR to the assessment of an judge. On the constitutional level, the judgment also deserves criticism. The court considered it justified to refer to the judicature of the Supreme Administrative Court, the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Tribunal, referring to some extent to the presidential prerogative of appointing judges at the request of the National Council of the Judiciary, in order to reach a conclusion about the almost „magically healing” effect of the presidential act of appointment to the office of judge. The NSA also did not comment on the total deprivation of any real influence of the judiciary on the nomination procedure. Therefore, one should ask what is the balancing of the legislative and executive powers with the judiciary power absent from the National Council of the Judiciary? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Balkan & Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences (BNEJSS) is the property of Balkan & Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences (BNEJSS) 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 Quaestio Iuris (QI) 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.)

Copyright of Zeitschrift für Bankrecht und Bankwirtschaft 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.)

The article considers some of the potentially unforeseen consequences to the Supreme Court's Decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. It centers on the case of Joana, who has frozen embryos at a bank and now wonders if they may have a right to life in her state. This is a new problem that has suddenly been created in her life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Computer und Recht 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.)