Suchergebnisse

The quinquennial Plenipotentiary Conference of the International Telecommunication Union opened in Buenos Aires on October 3, 1952; the final act of the Conference was signed on December 22, 1952. The agreement reached at the Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference of 1951 was endorsed by the Conference. After rejecting a proposal to eliminate the International Frequency Registration Board, the Conference considered various less drastic proposals to alter the structure and organization of the Board, and finally decided to maintain the Board at its present membership. As no new elections to the Board were held at the Buenos Aires meeting, the current members of the Board were considered reappointed. In revising the Atlantic City Convention, the Conference decided that countries, rather than individuals, should be elected to the Board and that each elected country should nominate one of its nationals to serve on the Board.

A meeting of a committee of the International Sugar Council was scheduled to open in London, September 29, 1952. The major question to be considered by the committee was the distribution of the world's sugar supply, in particular, the surplus accumulated in Cuba as a result of a record harvest. Many members of the organization were said to feel that a general reassessment of the marketing methods of sugar was needed in view of changed conditions of production. Some delegates were reported to favor asking the United Nations to convene a world sugar conference; it was pointed out that the principal obstacle to successful distribution of the world sugar supply was the lack of international convertibility of currencies. France, Belgium, Netherlands, United Kingdom, German Federal Republic, Peru, Haiti, Cuba, United States, and Indonesia were expected to send delegates to the meeting while observers were expected from Brazil, Mexico, Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Die Finanzkrise 2007/2008 und die derzeitige "Euro-Krise" stellen das bisherige Weltwährungssystem in Frage. Sie legt die Schwächen des aktuellen Systems schonungslos offen und zeigt, welchen herausragenden Stellenwert das internationale Währungssystem nach wie vor für die Stabilität von Märkten und ganzen Volkswirtschaften hat. Das DIW Berlin hat im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen untersucht, ob es grundlegende Alternativen zum bestehenden Wechselkursregime gibt. Grundsätzlich erweist sich keine der beiden Extremformen - komplett freie oder fixe Wechselkurse - als geeignet. In dem daher grundsätzlich zu empfehlenden Mischsystem sind aber Verbesserungen zum Status quo sinnvoll. Anzustreben ist ein Wechselkursregime mit einigen wenigen, großen Währungsraumen, die untereinander durch flexible Wechselkurse verbunden sind. Korrespondierend hierzu sollte sich ein multipolares Leitwährungssystem herausbilden, in dem neben dem gegenwärtig dominierenden US-Dollar auch der Euro und der chinesische Renminbi eine wichtige Rolle spielen dürften. Begleitet werden sollten diese Entwicklungen durch substanzielle Verbesserungen der regulatorischen Rahmenbedingungen der Finanzmärkte. Hierzu gehört neben einer verstärkten globalen und insbesondere europäischen wirtschaftspolitischen Koordinierung auch eine international abgestimmtere und durchsetzungsfähigere Finanzmarktaufsicht.

This handbook is the first comprehensive account of comparative environmental law. It examines in detail the methodological foundations of the discipline as well as the substance of environmental law across countries from four vantage points: country studies from all continents, responses to common problems (including air pollution, water management, nature conservation, genetically modified organisms, climate change and energy, chemicals, waste), foundational components of environmental law systems (including principles, property rights, administrative and judicial organisation, command-and-control regulation, market mechanisms, informational techniques and liability mechanisms), and common interactions of environmental protection with the broader public, private, and criminal law contexts.

State childcare parentage laws, that is, laws designating parents for custody, visitation, parental responsibility allocation, parental decisionmaking and/or support purposes, have evolved dramatically in the past half century. The (r)evolution is due to major changes in both reproductive technologies and human conduct. Yet the (r)evolution is incomplete. The (r)evolution is especially incomplete in Illinois. Recent statutory amendments in Illinois chiefly reflect the work of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in its 2000 model Uniform Parentage Act, not its 2017 Uniform Parentage Act. The latter better addresses the effects on childcare parentage of the changes in both reproductive technologies and human conduct. As well, the latest Illinois statutes do not reflect the NCCUSL's 2018 model Uniform Nonparent Child Custody and Visitation Act which also address the changes in the ways in which American families are formed and reformed by expecting and existing legal parents. Finally, the 2019 draft of the American Law Institute Restatement of the Law on Children and the Law has only recently been available to Illinois lawmakers. Any (r)evolution in Illinois childcare parentage laws should not be fully fueled by the NCCUSL or ALI pronouncements. While a few other states have substantially embraced the 2017 UPA, it embodies certain public policy choices over which lawmakers can quite reasonably differ. As well, the 2017 UPA presents significant constitutional challenges. Parentage law (r)evolution in Illinois is chiefly the responsibility of the General Assembly. When asked to develop broad childcare parentage norms, the Illinois Supreme Court unanimously deferred, finding the complex issues merit broad "policy debate" in the General Assembly. Illinois legislators will be challenged when contemplating new parentage laws. The laudable goals of promoting certainty, recognizing the import of *912 blood ties, furthering children's best interests, respecting family members' wishes, protecting parental rights, and enhancing public welfare often cannot be simultaneously pursued. Yet the General Assembly must act. Neither Congress nor the United States Supreme Court is likely to soon demand more national uniformity on parentage. Thus, as with many other family law matters (like marriage dissolution, heirs in probate, and standing to sue in tort), lawmaking on childcare parentage will substantially remain for state lawmakers. This Article first briefly notes some recent significant changes in technology and human conduct impacting legal parentage. Then it examines the federal constitutional boundaries on state childcare parent laws. Next it explores the diverse array of models, statutes and precedents on childcare parentage now operating outside of Illinois. Then it looks at current Illinois parental childcare laws. Finally, the Article elaborates on some of the key questions facing Illinois legislators when considering new childcare parentage norms.