Search result: 158 articles

x

Julian Gresser
Julian Gresser is a management consultant, international lawyer, professional negotiator and Japan specialist. He has twice been Visiting Mitsubishi Professor at the Harvard Law School and has served as an advisor to the US State Department, The World Bank, the European Commission, and the Prime Minister's Office of Japan. He is the author of Environmental Law in Japan (1981), Partners in Prosperity: Strategic Industries for the US in Japan (1984), and Piloting Through Chaos: Wise Leadership/Effective Negotiation for the 21st Century (1996). Mr Gresser is the Chairman of the Council on Alliance Mediation in the Association for Strategic Alliance Professionals (ASAP).

Peter L. Murray
Visiting Professor of Law from Practice, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA; Senior Fulbright Professor, University of Freiburg, Germany (Spring 1998); Lecturer on Law, University of St. Gallen Masters of European and International Business Law Programme.

Jens Drolshammer
Professor of Law, (Titularprofessor für Angloamerikanisches Recht und Rechtsgeschäftsplanung und -gestaltung), University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; Co-Founder and President of the Commission and Lecturer on Law, Master of European and International Business Law (M.B.L.-HSG) and Master of International Management Programmes at St. Gallen University; Partner, Homburger Rechtsanwälte, Zürich, Switzerland; Visiting Scholar and Fellow, Harvard Law School (Spring 1999).

Günter Müller Stewens
Professor of Management and Organization at the University of St. Gallen; Managing Director of the Institute of Management.

Jens Drolshammer
Professor of Law, (Titularprofessor für Angloamerikanisches Recht und Rechtsgeschäftsplanung und -gestaltung), University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; Co-Founder and President of the Commission and Lecturer on Law, Master of European and International Business Law (M.B.L.-HSG) and Master of International Management Programs at St. Gallen University; Partner, Homburger Rechtsanwälte, Zürich, Switzerland; Visiting Scholar and Fellow, Harvard Law School (Spring 1999).

Markus U. Diethelm
Markus U. Diethelm is the Group General Counsel of Swiss Reinsurance Company, Zurich, Switzerland (lic.iur. University of Zurich Law School. JSM/JSD Stanford University). Swiss Re is one of the world's leading and financially strongest reinsurers, with roughly 9000 employees and gross premiums in 1999 of CHF 22.4bn. Swiss Re does business from over 70 offices in more than 30 countries. The world over, Swiss Re offers its clients added value in classic insurance covers, alternative risk transfer (ART) instruments and a broad range of supplementary services for comprehensive risk management.

Michael Pfeifer
Lecturer of Law, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and University of Basel, Switzerland, Master of European and International Business Law (M.B.L.-HSG) at St. Gallen University; Partner, VISCHER attorneys at law, Basel, Switzerland.

Jens Drolshammer
Professor of Law, Titularprofessor für Angloamerikanisches Recht und Rechtsgeschäftsplanung und -gestaltung University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; Co-Founder and President of the Commission and Lecturer on Law, Master of European and International Business Law (M.B.L.-HSG) and Master of International Management Programmes at St. Gallen University; Partner, Homburger Rechtsanwälte, Zürich, Switzerland; Visiting Scholar and Fellow, Harvard Law School (Spring 1999).

David B. Wilkins
Kirkland & Ellis Professor of Law and Director, Program on the Legal Profession, Harvard Law School. Special thanks to Jens Drolshammer for encouraging me to address this topic.

Jens Drolshammer
Professor of Law, (Titularprofessor für Angloamerikanisches Recht und Rechtsgeschäftsplanung und -gestaltung), University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; Co-Founder and President of the Commission and Lecturer on Law, Master of European and International Business Law (M.B.L.-HSG) and Master of International Management Programs at St. Gallen University; Partner, Homburger Rechtsanwälte, Zurich, Switzerland. The author thanks Professor Gunter Müller-Stewens, University of St. Gallen for valuable insights into basic issues of organization theory and Professor Frank Vischer, Emeritus of the University of Basel, for valuable insights into organization law. The text is based on the book of Günter Müller-Stewens, Jens Drolshammer, Jochen Kriegmeier, Professional Service Firms (Frankfurt a.M., 1999) pp. 50-80, part of a general introduction Professional Service Firms - Branchenmerkmale und Gestaltungsfelder des Managements. The author started this project during a stay as Visiting Scholar and as a Fellow at the Harvard Law School in the spring term 1999; the cutoff date of this article is March 1, 2000.

Tim Lindsey
BA (Hons), B Litt (Hons), LLB, Ph.D (Melb), Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Director, Asian Law Centre, both at The University of Melbourne.

Charles Freeland
Deputy Secretary General, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. Charles Freeland is writing here in his personal capacity. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of the Basel Committee or the Bank for International Settlements.

Michael Levi
Professor of Criminology, Cardiff University, Wales. Address for correspondence: Professor Michael Levi, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3WT, UK, Levi@Cardiff.ac.uk. The research on which this article is based was funded by the UK Economic & Social Research Council's Future Governance Research Initiative.

William Gilmore
Professor of International Criminal Law, University of Edinburgh

Nadirsyah Hosen
Nadirsyah Hosen is a lecturer at the State University of Islamic Studies (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta. He holds a Bachelor degree (IAIN, Jakarta), a Graduate Diploma in Islamic Studies (University of New England), a Master of Laws in Comparative Law(Northern Territory University), and a Master of Arts with Honours from the University of New England.

Christian Giordano
Department of Social Anthropology, University of Fribourg, Switzerland.

Sandra Lavenex
Institute of Political Science, University of Lucerne, Switzerland.

Shaohong Zhuang
MA in Advanced Legislative Sudies, IALS, University of London, LLB in Xiamen University, P.R. China, currently studying for MSc Management, Imperial College, London.

Eric B. Litwack
Eric B. Litwack holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from Queen's University at Kingston (Canada). He is a Lecturer in Philosophy at Queen's University at Kingston's International Study Centre, in East Sussex, UK. For assistance in the preparation of this work, he would like to express his gratitude to the University of London's IALS, where he recently completed a research fellowship. Thanks are also due to Grant Amyot, Gerard Horgan and Constantin Stefanou for their helpful critical comments.

Michal S. Gal
LL.B., LL.M., S.J.D. Senior Lecturer and Director of Law and MBA Program, Haifa University School of Law; Global Hauser Visiting Professor, NYU School of Law and Visiting Professor, Georgetown University. I would like to thank participants at the conference The Approximation of Laws by Non-EU Countries to the EU Aquis for their most thoughtful comments. Many thanks to Guy Harpaz, Lior Herman, Arie Reich, Avishalom Tor and Spencer Weber Waller for their thoughtful comments and to Asaf Kazir for research assistance. All errors and omissions remain, of course, the author's. Comments are welcome: mgalresearch@gmail.com

Fan Yang
Fan Yang, Research Fellow (MCIArb) LCIA (YIAG); PRC Representative of the Practice & Standards Committee, Arbitration Sub-Committee, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators; PhD Researcher (London) LL.M. (Birmingham) LL.B. (Shanghai) Certificate in International & Comparative Law (Cornell University (USA) & Universite Paris I - Sorbonne); Barrister (England & Wales, non-practising).
Article

Access_open Burgerlijk procesrecht en ideologie

Journal Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Issue 1 2011
Keywords civil procedure, ideology, principles of procedural law
Authors Remme Verkerk
AbstractAuthor's information

    This contribution offers a partial explanation of the differences between procedural systems. In most jurisdictions, civil procedural regulations constitute a carefully designed system. Generally, a number of underlying principles, guidelines, theories and objectives can be identified that clarify and justify more specific rules of procedure. It will be argued that the main differences between legal systems flow from different political and theoretical views of those who determine and shape the form of the legal process. This contribution identifies the ideological influences on the rules of procedure in a number of influential jurisdictions.


Remme Verkerk
Remme Verkerk was Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of Maastricht University. Presently he practices law at Houthoff Buruma.

    Multinational Companies may result in culture clashes, incompatibility of Western corporate governance and legal resolution strategies. As one of the most successful joint venture models, the high-profile Danone/Wahaha dispute has been accelerated into a two-year legal feud against the infringement of the famous brand of WAHAHA across jurisdictions. The case represents a significant watershed which reflects the status quo of controversies over cooperation and competition in China. Under the current legal framework, Danone’s withdrawal would serve as a wake-up call for both foreign investors and Chinese companies in the dramatically increasing cross-border merger & acquisitions. The seminal case perfectly illustrates unwritten issues about public opinion, nationalism and the rule of law. Danone v. Wahaha has also been commonly conceived as a landmark case through which Chinese side may verify the fairness of the Western judicial system, while the European party may regard it as a touchstone for China’s investment environment as well as the specific sphere of contract spirit. It also offers myriad lessons, including the need for watertight contracts, IP rights, and international arbitrations.


Quingxui Bu
Dr. iur., LL.M. (Queen’s University).
Article

OHADA’s Proposed Uniform Act on Contract Law

Formal Law for the Informal Sector

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 3-4 2011
Authors Claire Moore Dickerson
AbstractAuthor's information

    A great deal of effort and a great deal of erudition have gone into the preparation of the OHADA Uniform Act on Contract Law (preliminary draft) [hereinafter draft Uniform Act on Contract Law].1xThe participants at this conference need no introduction to OHADA. The following sources may be helpful to Anglophones seeking basic information about this uniform system of business laws, which includes both statutes (“uniform acts”) and institutions, and is effective in 16 West and Central African countries (with a 17th having signed and ratified the constitutive treaty). Books: C. Moore Dickerson (Ed.), Unified Business Laws for Africa: Common Law Perspectives on OHADA, 2009; Mator et al., Business Law in Africa: OHADA and the Harmonization Process, 2nd edn, 2007; M. Baba Idris (Ed.), Harmonization of Business Law in Africa: The Law, Issues, Problems & Prospects, 2007. Websites, all of which have English-language content, including unofficial translations of the principal OHADA documents: <www.ohada.com>, which also contains scholarly articles; and <www.juriscope.org>, which provides English-language commentary for three of the uniform acts. Also useful is OHADA’s official website, <www.ohada.org>; however, as of this writing (25 February 2011), it describes its English-language portion as still under construction.
    During OHADA’s legislature, the Council of Ministers, adopted at its meeting (13-15 December 2010) revisions to two of its eight existing statutes, namely the Uniform Act on the General Commercial Law (“Acte Uniforme relatif au Droit Commercial Général”, originally adopted 17 April 1997, 1 JO OHADA 1 (1 October 1997), available at <www.ohada.com>, hereinafter sometimes “UAGCL”) and the Uniform Act on Secured Interests (the official French title is “Acte Uniforme portant Organisation des Sûretés,” originally adopted 17 April 1997, 3 JO OHADA 1 (1 October 1997), available at <www.ohada.com>), and adopted a new Uniform Act on Cooperatives, not yet in effect. Because the revised and new texts have not yet been published in their official form as of this writing (25 February 2011), all discussions of the uniform acts, and in particular of the UAGCL, are based on the texts in force prior to that meeting, except for the references at infra notes 10, 19 & 22. The acronym “OHADA” stands for “Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires”, sometimes translated as “Organization for the Harmonization in Africa of Business Laws”.
    An important but simple observation is that by far the greater part of the economies in OHADA’s current and prospective member-countries is located in the informal sector. This reality inevitably will have an impact on the implementation of the proposed uniform act currently under discussion. To be sure, the uniform act, if adopted, will affect agreements in the formal sector. The focus here, however, is the informal sector, for which the draft uniform act is already remarkably suited, given its broad and clear fundamental principles, and its respect for local norms.

Noten

  • 1 The participants at this conference need no introduction to OHADA. The following sources may be helpful to Anglophones seeking basic information about this uniform system of business laws, which includes both statutes (“uniform acts”) and institutions, and is effective in 16 West and Central African countries (with a 17th having signed and ratified the constitutive treaty). Books: C. Moore Dickerson (Ed.), Unified Business Laws for Africa: Common Law Perspectives on OHADA, 2009; Mator et al., Business Law in Africa: OHADA and the Harmonization Process, 2nd edn, 2007; M. Baba Idris (Ed.), Harmonization of Business Law in Africa: The Law, Issues, Problems & Prospects, 2007. Websites, all of which have English-language content, including unofficial translations of the principal OHADA documents: <www.ohada.com>, which also contains scholarly articles; and <www.juriscope.org>, which provides English-language commentary for three of the uniform acts. Also useful is OHADA’s official website, <www.ohada.org>; however, as of this writing (25 February 2011), it describes its English-language portion as still under construction.
    During OHADA’s legislature, the Council of Ministers, adopted at its meeting (13-15 December 2010) revisions to two of its eight existing statutes, namely the Uniform Act on the General Commercial Law (“Acte Uniforme relatif au Droit Commercial Général”, originally adopted 17 April 1997, 1 JO OHADA 1 (1 October 1997), available at <www.ohada.com>, hereinafter sometimes “UAGCL”) and the Uniform Act on Secured Interests (the official French title is “Acte Uniforme portant Organisation des Sûretés,” originally adopted 17 April 1997, 3 JO OHADA 1 (1 October 1997), available at <www.ohada.com>), and adopted a new Uniform Act on Cooperatives, not yet in effect. Because the revised and new texts have not yet been published in their official form as of this writing (25 February 2011), all discussions of the uniform acts, and in particular of the UAGCL, are based on the texts in force prior to that meeting, except for the references at infra notes 10, 19 & 22. The acronym “OHADA” stands for “Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires”, sometimes translated as “Organization for the Harmonization in Africa of Business Laws”.


Claire Moore Dickerson
LL.M. in Taxation (New York University), J.D. (Columbia), Professor of Law and Breaux Chair in Business Law (Tulane University), permanent visiting professor (University of Buea).
Showing 121 - 140 of 158 results
1 2 3 4 5 7
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.