Search result: 298 articles

x
Article

Economic Inequality, Capitalism and Law

Imperfect Realization of Juridical Equality, the Right to Property and Freedom of Contract

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 4 2019
Keywords capitalism, inequality, juridical, law, property
Authors Shabir Korotana
AbstractAuthor's information

    There is a general unease among the public across all jurisdictions about the progressive economic inequality that seems to define the new normal, and this phenomenon has been succinctly documented in numerous prominent studies. This trend of capitalism has been supported by the existing structures of the common law, albeit contrary to the aim and purpose of its original principles. The studies show that the modern capitalist societies display a persistent trend of increasing inequality, and this is summed up by the observation that modern capitalism generates progressive and intense economic inequality.
    Capitalism as a socio-economic system is structured and sustained by the law and by socio-economic systems of institutions. Capitalism is not only a social ordering; essentially, it is a legal ordering. At the heart of this legal ordering are private laws, and tort law, but the most important is contract law: freedom of contract. It is common law, similar to the private law in other jurisdictions, that is responsible for the extreme inequality because it allows the institutions of capitalism to function freely and without much control. The open-ended capitalism that allows accumulation of wealth without ceiling causes progressive inequality in society and consequently works against the very freedom and individualism that are supposed to be the ideals of common law and capitalism. Because of the existing institutions of capitalism and the legal construct, freedom, fairness and the intended progress of the individual were not properly realized; the understanding of the ideas and principles of freedom, individualism, juridical equality, the right to property and freedom of contract have been imperfectly realized. With rising inequality, it is this imperfect realization, particularly of juridical equality that is in question.


Shabir Korotana
Shabir Korotana is Senior Lecturer in Commercial Law at Brunel Law School, Brunel University London.
Article

Split-Ticket Voting in Belgium

An Analysis of the Presence and Determinants of Differentiated Voting in the Municipal and Provincial Elections of 2018

Journal Politics of the Low Countries, Issue 3 2019
Keywords split-ticket voting, local elections, voting motives, Belgium, PR-system
Authors Tony Valcke and Tom Verhelst
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article tackles the particular issue of split-ticket voting, which has been largely overlooked in Belgian election studies thus far. We contribute to the literature by answering two particular research questions: (1) to what extent and (2) why do voters cast a different vote in the elections for the provincial council as compared to their vote in the elections for the municipal council?
    The article draws on survey data collected via an exit poll in the ‘Belgian Local Elections Study’, a research project conducted by an inter-university team of scholars.
    Our analysis shows that nearly 45% of the total research population cast a split-ticket vote in the local elections of 2018. However, this number drops to one out of four if we only consider a homogenous party landscape at both levels by excluding the numerous votes for ‘local’ lists (which occur mostly at the municipal level). This finding underlines the importance of accounting for the electoral and institutional context of the different electoral arenas in research on split-ticket voting in PR systems. In the Belgian context, split-ticket voting in 2018 also differed between the different parties and regions. Furthermore, it was encouraged by a higher level of education and familiarity with particular candidates. This candidate-centred and strategic voting was matched by party identification and the urban municipal context favouring straight-ticket voting. Other factors such as region, a rural municipal context and preferential voting seemed more relevant to determine voting for local parties than using the instrument of split-ticket votes as such.


Tony Valcke
Tony Valcke is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences of Ghent University (Belgium). He is a member of the Centre for Local Politics (CLP) and coordinator of the Teacher Training Department. His research, publications and educational activities focus on elections and democratic participation/innovation, (the history of) political institutions and (local) government reform, political elites and leadership, citizenship (education).

Tom Verhelst
Tom Verhelst is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences at Ghent University (Belgium) and a postdoctoral research fellow at the Department of Political Science at Maastricht University (the Netherlands). His research focuses on the Europeanisation of local government (with a particular interest for the regulatory mobilisation of local government in EU decision-making processes) and on the role and position of the local council in Belgium and the Netherlands (with a particular interest for local council scrutiny).
Human Rights Practice Reviews

Ukraine

Journal East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019
Authors Dr. Tetyana Antsupova
Author's information

Dr. Tetyana Antsupova
Dr. Habil, Judge of the Supreme Court Grand Chamber (Ukraine).
Article

Access_open International Commercial Courts in France: Innovation without Revolution?

Journal Erasmus Law Review, Issue 1 2019
Keywords international commercial court, dispute resolution, business court, Brexit, judicial system
Authors Alexandre Biard
AbstractAuthor's information

    In 2018, in the wake of Brexit, the French legal profession took several important measures to strengthen the competitiveness of France and the French legal system, and to make Paris an attractive go-to-point for businesses when the latter have to deal with international commercial litigation. When taking a closer look at it, Brexit is only the top of the iceberg, and has mostly served as a catalyst. Reasons explaining the development of international commercial courts in France are manifold. They are consequences of long-standing efforts aimed at boosting the French judicial marketplace to adapt it to the requirements of globalization and to the expectations of multinational corporations. The setting-up of the French international business courts has made several procedural adjustments necessary. Although the latter undoubtedly represent clear innovations, they however do not constitute a full-blown revolution. France has indeed decided to maximize already-existing procedural rules, combined with a new organisational format inspired by the Common Law tradition. If it remains too early to draw clear conclusions on the impact of these new developments, it is essential to keep our ears to the ground, and to be forward-looking. We should carefully consider the possible side-effects on the French justice system considered as a whole, and in particular wonder whether these international commercial courts might in the future open the door to broader far-reaching evolutions within the judicial system. Finally, the multiplication of international business courts across Europe nowadays triggers some questions concerning the role and potential added value of an EU initiative in this domain.


Alexandre Biard
Postdoctoral researcher, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Matchmaking International Commercial Courts and Lawyers’ Preferences in Europe

Journal Erasmus Law Review, Issue 1 2019
Keywords choice of court, commercial court, lawyers’ preferences, survey on lawyers, international court
Authors Erlis Themeli
AbstractAuthor's information

    France, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands have taken concrete steps to design and develop international commercial courts. Most of the projects claim to be building courts that match the preferences of court users. They also try to challenge England and Wales, which evidence suggests is the most attractive jurisdiction in the EU. For the success of these projects, it is important that their proposed courts corresponds with the expectations of the parties, but also manages to attract some of the litigants that go to London. This article argues that lawyers are the most important group of choice makers, and that their preferences are not sufficiently matched by the new courts. Lawyers have certain litigation service and court perception preferences. And while the new courts improve their litigation service, they do not sufficiently addressed these court perception preferences.


Erlis Themeli
Postdoc, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Case Reports

2019/20 How to interpret the Posting of Workers Directive in the cross-border road transport sector? Dutch Supreme Court asks the ECJ for guidance (NL)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Private International Law, Posting of Workers and Expatriates, Applicable Law
Authors Zef Even and Amber Zwanenburg
AbstractAuthor's information

    In this transnational road transport case, the Dutch Supreme Court had to elaborate on the ECJ Koelzsch and Schlecker cases and asks for guidance from the ECJ on the applicability and interpretation of the Posting of Workers Directive.


Zef Even
Zef Even is a lawyer with SteensmaEven, www.steensmaeven.com, and professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Amber Zwanenburg
Amber Zwanenburg is a lecturer and PhD Candidate at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Pending Cases

Case C-17/19, Social Insurance

Bouygues travaux publics, Elco construct Bucarest, Welbond armatures, reference lodged by the Cour de cassation (France) on 10 January 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Rulings

ECJ 8 May 2019, case C-631/17 (Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst), Social Insurance

SF – v – Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst, Dutch case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Social insurance
Abstract

Pending Cases

Case C-370/17, Social Insurance

Caisse de retraite du personnel navigant professionnel de l’aéronautique civile (CRPNPAC) – v – Vueling Airlines SA, reference lodged by the Tribunal de grande instance de Bobigny (France) on 19 June 2017

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-428/18, Social Insurance, Pension

Jörg Paul Konrad Fritz Bode – v – Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social and Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social, reference lodged by the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia (Spain) on 28 June 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-811/18, Social Insurance, Gender Discrimination

KA– v – Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) and Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS), reference lodged by the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Canarias (Spain) on 21 December 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-29/19, Social Insurance

ZP – v – Bundesagentur für Arbeit, reference lodged by the Bundessozialgericht (Germany) on 16 January 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-240/19, Social Insurance

FA – v – Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS), reference lodged by the Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo No 2 de Ourense (Spain) on 20 March 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Rulings

ECJ 11 April 2019, case C-483/17 (Tarola), Social Security

Neculai Tarola – v – Minister for Social Protection, Irish case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Social Insurance
Abstract

Pending Cases

Case C-203/18, Social Insurance

Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann – v – Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, reference lodged by the Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Germany) on 20 March 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-96/18, Social Insurance

Sociale Verzekeringsbank – v – C.E. Franzen, reference lodged by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) on 9 February 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-135/19, Social Insurance, Pension

Pensionsversicherungsanstalt – v – CW, reference lodged by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) on 20 February 2019

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-32/18, Social Insurance

Tiroler Gebietskrankenkasse – v – Michael Moser, reference lodged by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) on 18 January 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-610/18, Social Insurance

AFMB Ltd and Others – v – Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank, reference lodged by the Centrale Raad van Beroep (The Netherlands) on 25 September 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-37/18, Social Insurance

Vueling Airlines SA – v – Jean-Luc Poignant, reference lodged by the Cour de cassation (France) on 19 January 2018

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Showing 1 - 20 of 298 results
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 15
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.