Search

Empirical studies indicate that business compliance with the UK Modern Slavery Act is disappointing, but they struggle to make sense of this phenomenon. This article offers a novel framework to understand how business organizations construct the meaning of compliance with the UK Modern Slavery Act. Our analysis builds on the endogeneity of law theory developed by Edelman. Empirically, our study is based on the analysis of the modern slavery statements of 10 FTSE 100 (Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 Index) companies in the food and tobacco sector, backed by interviews with business, civil society, and public officers. We offer a dynamic model that draws attention to the role of compliance professionals in framing ambiguous rules and devising a variety of organizational responses to modern slavery law. Contrary to extant research that tends to praise organizations for going “beyond compliance”, our study underlines the risks of managerialization of modern slavery law, whereby merely symbolic structures come to be associated with legal compliance, even when they are ineffective at tackling modern slavery.

Wyoming is one of the 50 states of the United States (“U.S.”), located in the Mountain Division in the Western part of the U.S. It is spacious and mountainous with beautiful rivers and valleys. The economy in Wyoming is tied to mining, agriculture, and tourism. However, for the past couple of years, Wyoming has been aiming to become one of the promising crypto lands. Wyoming has enacted multiple crypto laws that seek to create a very friendly environment for blockchain and virtual currency businesses. But to what end?

This paper analyses what corp orate social responsibility (CSR) means in the European Union law context. It inquires whether this notion is similar to other already established legal concepts in EU law, and if so to what extent. This paper starts with an introduction to the European Union’s policy approach towards corporate social responsibility and compares the one from 1998 with the most recent one. This evolution shows the EU’s realization of the globally recognized shift of corporate values and the importance of CSR for the EU Internal Market. Aside of the corporate social responsibility notion, the EU has developed its own concepts emanating from the general principles and fundamental rights and values of EU law interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Furthermore, in the wake of the codification endeavour of the European contract law, the term of social justice has been established and often referred to in the context of contract and private law. Thus, it is the aim of this article to analyse the content and meaning of these terms as well as their proximity. It is the argument of this paper that these terms represent synonyms for one another, and as such could be used interchangeably. Such finding is extremely relevant given the recent frequent use of CSR contractual provisions. The real understanding of the meaning of CSR is necessary for future interpretation and application of CSR contractual clauses within the European Union and possibly outside, if parallels can be drawn. Ultimately, this article suggests direct applicability of the existing Court of Justice of the European Union’s case law on fundamental rights and social justice for future cases with a CSR aspect.

Crowdfunding is a way of raising money through small contributions from a large number of investors, i.e. a “crowd.” Crowdfunding constitutes a common denominator for a number of financing methods, from donations through lending up to venture capital, all taking place online. Therefore, there are numerous legal challenges, namely use of copyright, distribution of loans and credits, or possible sale of securities. This chapter focuses on the development of equity crowdfunding, which shows many similarities with classical initial public offering (IPO) as a financing tool, yet on a smaller scale. The chapter analyzes the existing regulatory framework of equity crowdfunding in the United States and in the European Union.

FinTech is the word that has been receiving a lot of attention recently. This term originates from the merger of “finance” and “technology”. It represents an innovative and emerging field that affects the future of financial markets. Innovation in diverse formats and contents has been the driving force of any financial market. Yet, now the innovation seems to be more than a driving force. It might have become the key for a survival. Modern financial regulation has been predominantly economically driven, progressing from addressing market failures to creating more efficient, competitive and reliable markets. The European Union has for number of decades been struggling with creating a true integrated single market for financial services. Investors, professional or retail, often have lacked trust in non-domestic or cross-border products, whereas financial institutions, unless sufficiently robust, remain active only in their known (domestic or regional) territories and the capital market remains cleft. This paper argues that with adequate regulation of FinTech in the European Union, the Union could finally bridge the divide and finally establish an effective capital market.

The European Union encourages individuals to save in private and occupational pension funds to complement their state saving-plans. Throughout their lives, employers directly sponsor occupational retirement saving plans, so individual employees may top up their future pensions. While the European Union clearly supports the formation and cross-border participation in these financial vehicles by adopting EU regulatory framework, the EU has also decided to determine a common investment decision standard to be used in all Member States, called the Prudent Person Principle. According to this principle, the fund - the future retirement for many - shall be managed with care, the skill of an expert, prudence and due diligence. Under this principle, the pension fund’s governing body is given a broad authority to invest the pension assets in a prudent fashion in light of the particular investment plan of a fund. At the same time, the EU is also moving towards more Responsible Investment and inclusion of the ESG-principles (Environment, Social and Governance). The question we aim to answer in this paper is how these two principles co-exist and whether, due to the new Directive adopted by the occupational pension funds in 2016, all funds are obliged to make only responsible, environmentally and socially beneficial investments., Nordic Journal of Commercial Law, No 1 (2017)

To create healthy and efficient market economy, a viable legal framework which protects the ownership of individuals is a requirement. A part of this legal framework is formed by a secured transactions law which in the United States represent one of the most important branches of laws which allows the creditor to take a security interest on a debtor's collateral and in case of default the creditor is entitled to take advantage of the collateral directly. Since the beginning of the 1990s in the area of Central Europe there have been several attempts to introduce new secured transactions law. This effort succeeded only partially and therefore the whole system does not work efficiently. Central and Eastern European countries suffer from devotion to "traditional legal principles" which stem up from Roman legal tradition and therefore are unable to reflect upon new market tendencies appropriately. In this article we introduce and describe the self-help repossession which represents an extrajudicial enforcement tool for secured creditors in the United States. Subsequently, we assess the self-help repossession in our legal systems, in particular Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. It will be shown that despite Supreme Court's or Constitutional Court's decisions prohibiting self-help repossession, this enforcement tool is frequently applied and exercised.

Danish Parliament adopted a law (L190) that abolishes the formation of entrepreneurial companies (ivaerksaetterselskab) IVS in Denmark. This decision has raised surprise and concern from business and academic communities, questioning the decision-making processes of the Danish government. The entrepreneurial company form was introduced in 2014 with the aim to strengthen the entrepreneurship in Denmark. Currently the Government claims that the aim has not been reached. Based on the analysis prepared by the Danish Business Authority (Erhvervsstyrelsen) from September 2018 there are reasons to dissolve or transform all the existing IVS companies within the next two years and abrogate the IVS form from the Danish Companies Act completely. In this short essay, I briefly introduce the IVS company form and reflect on the Analysis prepared by the Danish Business Authority. I provide some thoughts on the substance of this Analysis and its key weaknesses when justifying their main outcomes, for which the IVS form is to be repealed – that these companies have, to a greater extent than expected, led to an increased risk of fraud and tax evasions. I conclude the article with few reflections on the minimum capital requirement, importance of legislative review and building entrepreneurship in Denmark. These conclusions are however universal and applicable across diverse jurisdictions.