Search result: 235 articles

x
Year 2013 x

Dániel Bán
Attorney (Perényi & Bán), guest instructor (Law School, Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church).

Sándor Szemesi
Associate professor (University of Debrecen, Faculty of Law, Department of European and Public International Law). He received his Ph.D. degree in 2008, his main area of research is the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, with special regard to the prohibition of discrimination and the questions of jurisdiction.

Jan Klabbers
Professor of International Law at the University of Helsinki, and currently (spring 2013) a Visiting professor at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva.
Book Review

Nagy Boldizsár, A Magyar Menekültjog és Menekültügy a Rendszerváltozástól az Európai Unióba Lépésig – Erkölcsi, Politikai-filozófiai és Jogi Vizsgálódások

(Boldizsár Nagy, Refugee Law and the Status of Refugees in Hungary from the Change of Regime to the accession to the European Union – Moral, Political Philosophical and Legal Disquisitions, Budapest, Gondolat Kiadó 2012)

Journal Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, Issue 1 2013
Authors Eszter Kirs
Author's information

Eszter Kirs
Ph.D., associate professor, Department of Public International Law, Faculty of Law, Miskolc University. Her main field of research includes international criminal law and transitional justice. Member of a defence team (Prlic et al.) at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Member of the Board of the Hungarian Fulbright Association.

Péter Kovács
Juge à la Cour Constitutionnelle de la République de Hongrie et professeur de droit international à l’Université Catholique Péter Pázmány.

Erzsébet Kardos Kaponyi
Full-time professor of the Institute of International Studies at Corvinus University of Budapest. Her teaching and research activity focuses on two distinct fields: European Community Law and Human Rights. Her main fields of expertise are the interdisciplinarity dimensions of human rights.

Petra Lea Láncos
Adjunct professor at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University of Budapest, Faculty of Law at the Department for European Law. She is also member of the secretariat of the Hungarian Deputy Commissioner for the Protection of the Interests of Future Generations (“Green Ombudsman”).

László Blutman
Professor of International and European Law, University of Szeged (Hungary); LL.M (New York University, NY), Ph.D. (University of Szeged).
Article

The Case of Franz Joseph and Lajos Kossuth before the English Court of Chancery

Legal Battle over the Ruins of a Repressed Revolution with Its Still Topical International Law Consequences

Journal Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, Issue 1 2013
Authors Marcel Szabó
Author's information

Marcel Szabó
Chair, European Law Department of the Faculty of Law and Political Sciences of Péter Pázmány Catholic University (Budapest), Deputy-Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, responsible for the protection of the interests of future generations, Hungary. Former Visiting Fellow at the Lauterpach Research Centre for International Law (Cambridge) as well as the Centre for European Legal Studies (Cambridge).

Balázs Fekete
Lecturer in law, Pázmány Péter Catholic University Faculty of Law and Political Sciences/Research fellow, Centre for Social Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Article

State Acts and Responsibility in the Hungarian-Azeri-Armenian Triangle of the Safarov Case

A Legal Analysis of the Transfer and Liberation of the Notorious Convict in the Hungarian-Azeri-Armenian Triangle

Journal Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, Issue 1 2013
Authors Csaba Törő
Author's information

Csaba Törő
Associate professor, Faculty of Law, Karoli Gaspar Protestant University and senior research fellow, Hungarian Institute of International Affairs.
Article

The Personal Law of Companies and the Freedom of Establishment under EU Law

The Enthronement of the Country-of-origin Principle and the Establishment of an Unregulated Right of Cross-Border Conversion

Journal Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, Issue 1 2013
Authors Csongor István Nagy
Author's information

Csongor István Nagy
Doctor juris (Budapest), LL.M. (Budapest/New York), Ph.D. (Budapest), SJD (Budapest/New York). Associate professor at and head of the Private International Law Department of the University of Szeged (Hungary), associate professor at Budapest University of Technology and Economics (Hungary), and head of the International and EU Law Department of the István Bibó College of Law (Budapest) and visiting associate professor at the Sapientia University in Cluj-Napoca (Romania). The author was a visiting fellow at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (London) at the time the paper was completed.

Eva Nanopoulos
Bob Alexander Fellow and Lecturer in Law at King’s College, Cambridge, where she is also acting as Director of Studies in Law and Equal Opportunities Tutor.

Penelope Nevill
Barrister at 20 Essex Street, London and Visiting Tutor in Public International Law, King’s College, London, and Affiliated Lecturer, University of Cambridge.

Petra Bárd
LL.M. SJD, works as a senior researcher at the National Institute of Criminology, where she is also the Head of the Criminal Law Division. As a lecturer at the Central European University, Legal Studies Department she teaches EU constitutional law, EU criminal law, human rights in the EU and selected issues in criminology and forensic sciences. At ELTE School of Law she teaches criminology and data protection law. In her writings she primarily addresses European constitutionalism, human rights in the European Union, the rights of persons living with disabilities and judicial and police cooperation in criminal matters.

    This article seeks to critically analyse the European Commission's Proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes (COM (2011) 126). It focuses upon the coordination of the Proposal's provisions on jurisdiction and applicable law with the parallel provisions contained in other related EU private international law instruments, namely those relating to divorce (Brussels II bis and Rome III) and succession (Succession Regulation). In doing so, the article adopts a 'stress-test' approach, presenting scenarios in which interaction between these related instruments takes place. The compositions and circumstances of the fictitious couples in these scenarios are varied in order to fully illustrate the potential consequences of the interplay between the instruments. This article seeks to assess the extent to which (in)consistency exists between the current and proposed EU private international instruments and, by evaluating this interaction through a number of norms, how identified inconsistencies impact upon international couples' legal relationships. In order to ensure the analysis remains as up to date as possible, the article will also take into account relevant changes introduced in the latest revised versions of the Proposal.


Jacqueline Gray LL.M.
Jacqueline Gray studied law at the University of Glasgow (2006-2010) and European law at the Leiden University (2010-2011). Following this, she undertook a four-month internship at the Molengraaff Institute for Private Law and five-month traineeship at the European Parliament in Brussels. She is now a PhD student at the Molengraaff Institute for Private Law, where she is writing her dissertation on party autonomy in the EU private international law relating to family matters and succession.

Pablo Quinzá Redondo LL.M.
Pablo Quinzá Redondo, a research scholar funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, is currently undertaking a PhD at the University of Valencia. His specialisation concerns 'The europeanisation of matrimonial property regimes from a substantive and private international law perspective'. Prior to commencing his PhD, he completed undergraduate degrees in both Law and Administration and Business management (2004- 2010), as well as a Master’s degree in Company Law (2010-2012), at the University of Valencia.

    In this response to my five critics, I note the strength of the arguments in favour of treating the presumption of innocence as a narrow, legal presumption that operates only within the criminal process; but I then try to make clearer my reasons for talking of different presumptions of innocence (moral, rather than legal, presumptions) outside the criminal process, in other contexts in which issues of criminal guilt or innocence arise – presumptions that guide or are expressed in the conduct of the state’s officials towards its citizens, and of citizens towards each other. Once we look at these other contexts in which criminal guilt and innocence (of past and future crimes) are at stake, we can see the importance of civic trust as a practical attitude that citizens owe to each other; and the fruitfulness of examining the various normative roles that citizens may have to play in relation to the criminal law.


Antony Duff
Antony Duff holds the Russell M and Elizabeth M Bennett Chair in the University of Minnesota Law School, and is a Professor Emeritus of the Department of Philosophy, University of Stirling.


Anne Ruth Mackor
Anne Ruth Mackor is Professor of Professional Ethics, in particular of legal professions, at the University of Groningen.

Vincent Geeraets
Vincent Geeraets is Lecturer at the Faculty of Law of the VU University Amsterdam.
Article

Access_open The Meaning of the Presumption of Innocence for Pre-trial Detention

An Empirical Approach

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 3 2013
Keywords pre-trial detention practice, presumption of guilt, incapacitation, presumption of innocence
Authors Lonneke Stevens
AbstractAuthor's information

    The presumption of innocence (PoI) is considered to be an important principle for regulating pre-trial detention. The idea is that pre-trial detention should be a last resort. However, pre-trial detention practice demonstrates that pre-trial detention does not function on the basis of a presumption of innocence but rather from a presumption of guilt and dangerousness. It must be concluded that, with regard to pre-trial detention, the PoI has a rather limited normative effect.


Lonneke Stevens
Lonneke Stevens is Associate Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure at VU University Amsterdam.
Article

Access_open Retributivist Arguments against Presuming Innocence

Answering to Duff

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 3 2013
Keywords broad presumption of innocence, retributivism, punishment of innocents, vicarious liability of car owners, drink-driving tests of non-suspects
Authors Alwin A. van Dijk
AbstractAuthor's information

    Factors justifying not presuming innocence are generally incorporated into the Presumption of Innocence (PoI). A confusing discourse has resulted: numerous guilt-presuming acts are deemed consistent with the PoI. I argue for an unusually broad PoI: any act that might convey to a reasonable actor that he is not presumed innocent of a punishable offence constitutes a PoI interference. Thus, academic debate need only be about the question what PoI interferences are justifiable or unjustifiable. This question must be answered using pro- and anti-PoI values. I analyse three PoI interferences in relation to Duff’s retributivist punishment theory: presumptions of guilt, vicarious liability of car owners and coercing non-suspects into proving their sobriety. Retributivists tend to castigate such procedures based on their (supposed) consequentialist rationale. I argue, however, that they might also be justified on retributivist grounds. The retributivist anti-PoI duty to punish the guilty may be the worst enemy of innocents.


Alwin A. van Dijk
Alwin A. van Dijk is Assistant Professor of Criminal Law at the University of Groningen.
Showing 41 - 60 of 235 results
1 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.