Search

This short article considers a theme emerging from Trevor Hartley's writing on the topic of anti-suit injunctions – the significance of the existence of an international treaty that regulates the circumstances in which the States concerned may or must assert, and may or must decline, jurisdiction with respect to the subject matter of the dispute. It examines, in particular, recent case law extending the reach of the European Union's prohibition on anti-suit injunctions within the Brussels I regime, and the place of anti-suit injunctions within the framework of the Hague Choice of Court Convention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Corporate interests have contaminated the world and our bodies with chemical pollutants in pursuit of profit. In this Article, I argue that this contamination of our bodies with chemicals constitutes an offensive battery, a violation of our right to be free from nonconsensual contacts. I describe how our bodies are contaminated via factory discharges, train derailments and chemical spills, our use of consumer goods, and the workplace. I argue that traditional toxic tort and statutory environmental law do nothing to prevent this and in fact encourage polluting behaviors by limiting the polluters' right to pollute only when the pollution can be scientifically shown to cause us physical harm. I discuss how pollution in the absence of physical harm still violates our interest in bodily integrity and autonomy and treats us as less than, as mere means for corporate interests to realize their profits. I analyze the prima facie case for treating pollution as an offensive battery, focusing on the elements of voluntary act, intent, and offense. I evaluate consent and necessity as possible defenses and conclude that they do not hold in most cases of chemical pollution. I discuss the remedies available for pollution victims, including compensatory damages for those who need medical monitoring, punitive damages to punish the polluters who wantonly disregard our rights for their own profits, and injunctive relief to stop ongoing polluting behaviors and inform the public about the chemicals to which they are exposed through consumer goods. In sum, this Article is an attempt at a first step to putting up meaningful boundaries on the cavalier polluting behaviors that have gotten us to this point. There is an urgent need to curtail the discharge of novel substances, in particular, and toxic offensive battery is a theory of liability that could be employed to hold polluters accountable. It is also a theory of liability that reflects a different way of thinking about our relationship to pollution, something we desperately need after more than fifty years of ineffective policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on debates concerning crisis-laden horizons and the affective modes and narrative templates of environmentalism, this paper examines claims about how the feel of the affective present might or should be organised. To do so, it focuses on the appearance of futility in seabird research and conservation to consider what it reveals about injunctions to act and jarring encounters with crisis. Caught between futility's capacity to both enliven and flatten, the paper examines the contentious nature of futility's public utterance and its persuasive expression, to ask what futility does to the grip of ideas and claims about how things ought to be done. Taking leave from debates on how to stave off paralysis in an era of extinction and loss, the paper focuses on what it feels like to dwell in a refigured present in which futility becomes a corporeal condition. In doing so, the paper reflects on how limits can impose themselves in ways that are not addressed in debates over what constitutes good or bad affect or appropriate forms of address. It finishes by raising questions about what happens when researchers become responsible for stoking negative affect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Note discusses the intricate landscape of water rights and obligations in the western United States, focusing on recent legal developments and the historical state of the law. It analyzes the applicability of the recent Navajo Nation Supreme Court decision to older interstate water compacts, as well as how the affirmative action holding in that case affects the system of water rights adjudication. After an examination of the history of water rights, case law, and legislative materials, this Note turns its focus to whether a private right of action exists that would require an upstream water rights holder to take affirmative action to ensure the fulfillment of a downstream right. This Note evaluates the existence of the right through the use of a hypothetical Colorado water rights case, which incorporates a myriad of historical precedents to establish jurisdiction, a cause of action, and a likely outcome of the case. Based on the current state of the law, this Note concludes that a downstream water rights holder would likely be granted an injunction that would promote an upstream user to take affirmative action to fulfill downstream rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this response to the forum, I argue that if we think of zones not so much as spatial zones but as time zones, a new way of understanding the pixelated decentralization of politics comes into view. By explicit intention, the zone is designed to punch people out of a shared horizon or a space of capture in the quintessentially modern metrics of per capita growth or standard of living. While offering peculiar usable pasts often related to creative not to say anachronistic understandings of indigenous politics, the zone is also a better iconic scale for the end of history in the grand sense than the nation or even the world in its sloughing off the injunctions of mass politics and popular sovereignty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three literature reviews of controlled longitudinal studies of child outcomes of customary physical punishment have arrived at contradictory conclusions. We attempt to explain the contradiction using meta-analyses based on two types of change-scores and two sensitivity tests. We hypothesized that studies employing standard ANCOVA-type longitudinal analyses would suggest harmful-looking (but trivial) effects, and studies employing simple difference scores would suggest beneficial-looking (but trivial) effects of customary spanking on four child outcomes. We hypothesized that age (18 mos − 11 yrs) would moderate these associations. We hypothesized that spanking to enforce timeout in randomized studies of clinically defiant young children would predict large improvements in children's cooperation with timeout and parental commands. All hypotheses were supported. Regardless of statistical method, customary spanking explained less than 1% of the remaining variance in each child outcome (after controlling for baseline adjustment). The oft-reported harmful-looking outcomes of customary physical punishment in ANCOVA-type analyses are likely due to residual confounding. Various methodological problems and needed innovations in parental discipline research are discussed. Given the seeming near-zero effect of customary spanking, and the large beneficial-looking effects of spanking to enforce time-out in clinic-based intervention programs, blanket anti-spanking injunctions are discouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In its decision, the UPC Court of Appeal confirms the application of key principles of patent claim interpretation for unitary patents. With regard to the inventive step, a tentative path is chosen that does not clearly follow the problem–solution approach of the European Patent Office and instead, comprehensively takes the state of the art into account at the outset. The standard for the necessary probability of infringement and validity is set at a preponderance of probability (sufficient degree of certainty, ie more likely than not). Furthermore, the temporal and factual necessity of the injunction is also important in determining whether a preliminary injunction should be ordered. Ultimately, the granting of injunctive relief hinges on an overall weighing of the interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on a dataset of 263 contempt of court decisions, this paper examines a widespread but under-interrogated phenomenon: imprisonment for breach of injunctions. Across a wide range of contexts – from cases involving anti-social behaviour, protest, Gypsy and Traveller communities – courts across the country are using their civil contempt of court powers to imprison individuals for breaching injunctions. As the first research to date that explicitly examines this issue, the paper falls into four parts. First, it introduces the powers to make an injunction; in section 2 the courts' powers on committal are outlined. Section 3 introduces the dataset on which this paper is based. Finally, section 4 explores the geographical distribution of cases, sentencing decisions, and the representation of defendants in these proceedings. We identify significant disparities in the application and enforcement of injunctions, raising critical questions about legal practices, fairness and equality. We advocate for ongoing academic research in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past 25 years, since the beginning of the process of Turkey's accession to the European Union (EU), the Turkish Republic has expanded its consumer protection strategy and adopted legislation in compliance with EU law. Still, full harmonisation has not been attained yet, particularly in the field of consumer disputes. One example is EU Collective Redress Directive 2020/1828 with which Turkish domestic law is still incompatible. The underlying objective of the introduction of the Collective Redress Directive is to establish effective and efficient collective action for consumers in order to provide injunctive relief and compensation to those harmed by the same or a similar infringement. The regime of collective actions in Turkey is, however, fragmented and in need of reform in order to protect the collective interests of consumers. The relevant legislation not only lacks the necessary elements required for the well-functioning of a collective action mechanism, but also does not allow the filing of a collective action for certain infringements of consumer law and for claiming damages for any infringement. This article therefore evaluates the EU collective redress regime to seek lessons to be learnt by Turkey, and, in light of this evaluation, aims to design a new legal framework for consumer collective redress in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explains recent developments in Korean competition law enforcement from three perspectives. First, the Korea Fair Trade Commission ('KFTC') has recently improved its public enforcement procedures, focusing on preventing the collection of irrelevant materials during its on-site investigations, ensuring confidentiality in the KFTC's investigations against the legal departments of investigated companies, and enabling more active participation from respondents in expressing their opinions. Second, the most significant progress in the enforcement of Korea's Monopoly Regulation and Fair-Trade Act ('MRFTA') is evident in criminal enforcement. The KFTC and various other national institutions are actively employing criminal penalties, compelling companies to consider criminal procedures early in their response to investigations. Third, advancements have also been made in private enforcement, including (1) increased damage suits by parties injured by MRFTA violations, (2) derivative suits initiated by shareholders to recover company losses, and (3) recent legislative efforts to promote private enforcement through injunctions that prevent and prohibit violations and assist the injured parties in proving damage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides a comprehensive survey of the most significant developments in 2023 related to domestic and international sales of goods, personal property leases, payments, letters of credit, documents of title, investment securities, and secured transactions. It highlights legislative progress, judicial decisions, and case law under various articles of the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) and the United Nations Convention on International Sales of Goods (C.I.S.G.). The survey also covers federal regulatory updates in the payments area and notable cases in different legal areas, offering valuable insights into legal interpretations and applications. [Extracted from the article]

What rules of fighting (armed combat) does Hinduism espouse? The sacred texts are the pre-eminent sources, so these need to be summarized and compared to each other. Teaching mostly through stories, the texts describe deeds of people (especially warriors), gods and demons to show how to behave and not to behave in war. While the injunctions in the Mahābhārata and Arthaśāstra are already covered in the literature, including in this journal, this present work examines the Purāṇas in depth. After a thorough search of all relevant passages, we find the Purāṇas to be very similar to the epics in terms of the list of prescribed and proscribed actions in war that they provide. We also make comparisons to international humanitarian law (IHL); as in the epics, we find that the Purāṇas contain many similar provisions to those found in IHL but that they go above and beyond what is required by IHL in urging that fighting be fair at the tactical level (i.e., between individual fighters). Being religious texts, the Purāṇas also deal with the afterlife consequences of both righteous and unrighteous combat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of the recent proposal for a regulation that would overhaul the entire standard essential patents licensing system (SEP Proposal), the European Commission has envisaged a pre-trial mandatory FRAND determination by a conciliator. The paper investigates the relationship between the FRAND determination process under such a proposal and the test developed by the European Court of Justice (CJEU) in Huawei v. ZTE, which represents the current guiding framework for SEP licensing negotiations in the EU. The paper aims at demonstrating that even, if the SEP Proposal were not to displace Huawei, it endorses an anti-injunction approach which is inconsistent with the CJEU's stance and is essentially triggered by the German case law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the availability of injunctions and the award of damages for patent infringement under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), in light of the principle of proportionality. Part I, published in the previous issue, focused on injunctive relief and analysed the application of the principle of proportionality to injunctions, outlining key factors and scenarios. Part II discusses the principles and methods applicable to the calculation of damages, assessing their suitability in light of the principle of proportionality, as defined in European Union law and in the case law of select contracting states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the revocation right and the 14-day objection period in relation to statutory exceptions under the Copyright Act. It presents a legal case involving a photographer and filmmaker who created a film portrait for an exhibition, highlighting disputes over rights and obligations between the parties involved. The text delves into the legal intricacies of revocation rights, contractual agreements, and the protection of authors' interests, providing insights into the legal framework governing intellectual property rights in cinematographic works. [Extracted from the article]

This article describes the French naturist milieu of the early 1950s. In line with the questions raised by this special issue, I focus on the commercial structures of naturism, such as the selling of natural products and foods and the renting of bungalows and camping pitches, and on its “guiding function,” namely the rationalization of the irrational through the use of the concept of natural laws and the injunctions stemming out these laws. Based on this case study, I invite the reader to rethink the categorizations of “religion” and “business” by considering what underpins them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an overview of third-party beneficiary rights in franchise law cases. It explains that franchisees can sometimes be considered third-party beneficiaries to agreements between their franchisors and other parties, such as vendors or other franchisees. These rights can determine whether a dispute has a remedy and can be used to establish standing to bring a lawsuit or determine liability. The article also discusses the use of third-party beneficiary rights in preventing franchisees from poaching each other's employees, although this practice has faced legal challenges. It emphasizes the importance of carefully reviewing the terms of the contract to determine the chances of success as a third-party beneficiary. [Extracted from the article]

This article explores alternatives to terminating a franchise agreement when a franchisee is in default. It discusses contractual provisions that franchisors can include in their agreements, such as remedial training and restrictions on access to financial measures, to facilitate compliance and cure defaults. The article also examines the use of step-in rights, which allow the franchisor to assume operation and management of the franchisee's business under certain circumstances. It emphasizes the importance of considering statutory provisions and balancing legal and business factors when deciding whether to terminate a franchise agreement or exercise contractual alternatives to termination. The authors recommend including permissive provisions in franchise agreements that allow for the exercise of contractual alternatives to termination. [Extracted from the article]

This essay explores mothers inhabiting the impossible position of carrying life and death's trauma. It delves into how this relation to death is not only entwined with the mother and infant's bodily conditions, but also with the birth of the human subject and the divide that constitutes us. By viewing the mother's crossing between life and death as a perpetual, moment-to-moment encounter, this paper discusses the impossible, idealized injunctions placed upon the mother, alongside the burdened demand to bear the most difficult and disavowed aspects of humanity. Drawing from Bracha Ettinger's (2006) work on intergenerational affective traces and a collective engagement with history, the essay uses vignettes to illustrate instances of the mother's relation to death in the unconscious, the significance of symbolization, and the possibilities that come with it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This empirical study explores the disconnect between doctrine and practice in the calculation of the life of permanent injunctions issued in trade secret misappropriation cases. The study draws upon findings from a content analysis of cases decided in federal trial court in the fourteen-year period between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2022. Case law and scholarly commentary on this topic suggest a legal doctrine that is rich, nuanced, and, indeed, rather elegant in its design. Modern doctrine directs courts to carefully refine the life of a permanent injunction barring further misappropriation by considering the time it would take for the misappropriator (or a good faith competitor) to independently develop the trade secret through legitimate business practices. The resulting injunction life, in theory at least, is fact-dependent, narrowly tailored, and precise in its terms. The key finding of this study is startling: What is said in doctrine is seldom what is applied in practice by courts in this arena. The great majority of courts issuing permanent injunctions for trade secret misappropriation paid little to no attention to the nuanced rules set forth by statute and case law; instead, they issued sparse permanent injunction provisions that did not reference time limits. In addition, in most instances the parties to the litigation did not engage with doctrine and did not seek more specificity on injunction duration. The study speculates that current practice may be efficient in terms of conserving judicial and litigant resources. However, we should not discount the value of nuanced rules for providing overarching frameworks for decision-making or for guiding outcomes in cases at the margin where the facts demand the application of more refined approaches. This study thus provides empirical evidence of actual practice regarding permanent injunction life in trade secret misappropriation cases and highlights pathways for future exploration into doctrinal development and judicial decision-making. It demonstrates that scholars, practitioners, and courts alike should approach doctrinal nuances with a degree of caution; it is patently risky to assume that an elegant, refined doctrine, even though articulated in statute or precedent, is necessarily what the parties will assert or what the courts will apply in the trenches of actual litigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Derecho Privado (0123-4366) is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia, Departmento de Derecho Civil 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 article examines the availability of injunctions and the award of damages for patent infringement under the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, in light of the principle of proportionality. Part I focuses on the injunctive relief and analyses the application of the principle of proportionality to injunctions, outlining key factors and scenarios. Part II, which will be published in the next issue, discusses the principles and methods applicable to the calculation of damages, assessing their suitability in light of the principle of proportionality, as defined in European Union law and in the case law of select contracting states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides excerpts from legal judgments in Brazil regarding trademark disputes. The courts emphasize the need for distinctiveness and originality in trademarks and consider factors such as visual elements and the nature of the products or services. The judgments also highlight the importance of considering the perspective of the average consumer and the rights of third parties. The courts uphold the original judgments and dismiss the appeals. [Extracted from the article]

The 2022 European Union-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement requires each party to "ensure that the judicial authorities may issue an injunction against an intermediary whose services are used by a third party to infringe intellectual property rights." Similar language appears in the 2022 United Kingdom-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement. These injunctions, known as "site-blocking orders", require Internet Service Providers to take reasonable steps to block access to online locations where infringing material can be accessed. While debate as to whether site-blocking orders should be available in New Zealand is now foreclosed, the trade agreements do not specify how such a regime should be organised. New Zealand should enact a legislative scheme that provides detailed guidance to decision-makers as to the circumstances in which site-blocking orders can be made. In the design of the regime, it would be helpful to draw on the legal analysis that has occurred in other jurisdictions, including the extensive analysis of the human rights implications of blocking orders, while tailoring the regime to the New Zealand legal context, taking account of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 and Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and relevant international human rights commitments. Given the relatively small size of the New Zealand market for creative content, consideration should be given to whether the power to grant orders should be vested in an administrative body, such as the Copyright Tribunal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explains what the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992 does and how it fits into the legal landscape of issues for developers and property owners to be mindful over. It draws from case law learning and from the practical experience of the writer in dealing with site access, crane oversailing licences and Part 8 claims. Its aim is to give prospective parties to access licences and those advising them a full insight into the issues that arise, a warning as to the costs of litigation and the confidence to start negotiating within sensible limits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article addresses whether a court must issue an injunction against a secured party proceeding with a noncomplying collateral disposition under Section 9-610 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). It considers a situation wherein a secured party makes a loan to a debtor, who later defaults on the loan after granting security interest to the debtor in a limited liability company. It explains the principles of equitable relief which limit the power of the court to order or restrain disposition.

The article delves into the complex terrain of legal battles involving federal agencies, exploring the nuanced dynamics between litigants and regulatory bodies. It scrutinizes the absence of a clear standard set by the Supreme Court for determining whether agency regulations should remain intact during litigation. It juxtaposes the traditional standards for granting stays and injunctions, dissecting their applicability in the context of challenges to agency actions.

The article focuses on the legal distinction between injunctions pending appeal and stays pending appeal, particularly in the context of emergency relief granted by the Supreme Court. It examines the statutory basis, purpose, and requirements for granting both types of relief, with a specific emphasis on the relevance of certiorari in the consideration of stays. It addresses recent criticisms of the Supreme Court's granting of emergency relief and proposed changes to the Court's approach.

Copyright of Revue Française de Gestion is the property of John Libbey Eurotext 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.)

Imagine the Supreme Court issuing an emergency order that signals interest in departing from precedent, as if foreshadowing a change in the law. Seeing this, should the lower courts start ruling in ways that also anticipate the law of the future? They need not do so in their merits rulings. That much is clear. Such a signal does not create new binding precedent. Rather, it reflects the Justices’ guess about the future of the law—and what if that guess is wrong? Yet for a lower court ruling on a temporary stay or injunction, the task seems to call for a guess about a future decision and hence a future state of the law. And if the Justices have already made such a guess in a parallel case, doesn’t the lower court have the answer it needs? Not necessarily, this analysis shows. It looks closely at the architecture of stays and injunctions in the federal courts, while drawing upon ideas presented in a rich new compilation of essays, Philosophical Foundations of Precedent. Intriguing questions for theory arise, in turn. For instance, should an earlier judicial guess ever be deemed binding on a later guess? That would not be stare decisis, of course—but could there be such a thing as stare divinatis? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The search for knowledge has been central to the Islamic tradition from its inception in the Quran and the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (aḥādīth). The injunctions to obtain knowledge and contemplate the signs of God in all things undergird a culture of ultimate questions in which there was an underlying epistemic unity among all fields of knowledge, from the religious sciences to the intellectual sciences to the natural sciences. Having lost sight of the underlying metaphysic that provides this epistemic unity, many thinkers in the modern period read the classical Islamic texts independently of the cognitive cartography and hierarchy of which they are a part. This approach leads to further misunderstandings and thus to a sense of hermeneutical gloom and epistemic subordination characteristic of coloniality. Postcolonial theory provides effective tools for diagnosing the process by which this epistemic erosion produces ideologically and epistemically conscripted subjects. But as it, too, arises from within a secular frame, it is only by understanding the cognitive cartography of the sciences within Islam that epistemic confidence and sovereignty can be reinstated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical perspectives challenge the figure of the hero. Meanwhile, the scientific debate lacks a conceptual framework to define the hero characteristics. The objectives of this research are to present and extend the hero-matrix, to use entrepreneurs with disabilities (EWD) as a means to test the matrix empirically, and to shed light on what defines a hero in our current post-modernist context. To do so, we interviewed 20 EWD twice over the course of a year. Our results show that a hero is someone who successfully copes with seven injunctions relating both to himself or herself as a person, and to someone who interacts with others. Disability seems to increase the intensity of each criterion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a 2020 decision in which a judge granted an interlocutory injunction evicting a homeless encampment from an unused, unfenced, publicly-owned parking lot in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic as a springboard, I present the first comprehensive survey of British Columbia homeless encampment injunction decisions, revealing a whopping 85% success rate when governments seek interlocutory injunctions against encampments. The stakes are high: Interlocutory injunction applications dominate homeless encampment litigation, exposing encampment residents to continual displacement and elevated risks of isolation, illness, violence, and death. I argue that courts hearing applications for interlocutory injunctions against homeless encampments on publicly-owned land should apply the full three-pronged RJR-MacDonald framework; apply a strong prima facie case standard to the first prong; avoid prejudging complex, contested evidential or legal issues at the interlocutory stage, on the basis of affidavit evidence alone; and raise the bar for interlocutory injunctions to a height that reflects the fundamental interests at stake in homeless encampment cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the revised test for interlocutory mandatory injunctions established by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2018, which has added complexity to obtaining such injunctions. Topics include the case of R. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., the threshold requirements for interlocutory injunctions, and the Supreme Court's clarification of the test for mandatory injunctions, emphasizing the need to demonstrate a strong prima facie case for success at trial.