Search results

Recent Cases Conflict of Laws--Jurisdiction--Assumption of Personal Jurisdiction over Non-Resident Insurer on the basis of a Single Insurance Contract ================================ Constitutional Law--Taxation--Tax Immunity of Federal Government not Infringed by Local Taxes upon Possession of Government Property ================================ Evidence--Hearsay--Utterance of Employee under Emotional Stress Admissible to Establish Scope of Employment and Render Employer Vicariously Liable ================================ Insurance--Automobile--Duplicating Recoveries allowed under Liability and Medical Payment Clauses of Automobile Liability Insurance Policy ================================ Insurance--Business Indemnity--Radiation Decontamination Expenses not Recoverable under a Business Interruption Clause ================================= Insurance--Life--Variable Annuity Contracts not Subject to Regulation by Securities and Exchange Commission ================================= Physicians--Unprofessional Conduct--Willful Evasion of Federal Taxes as an Offense Allowing Summary Action by Disciplinary Board ================================= Sales--Warranties--Liability of Manufacturer to Ultimate Consumer on Basis of Express Warranty Notwithstanding the Absence of Privity of Contract ================================= Workmen's Compensation--Recovery of Additional Compensation for Total Disability after Receipt of Maximum Schedule Benefits for Specific Injuries

The template of written constitutional rights has expanded across the world, and yet they operate as unevenly as do the formal organizations that are motivated to defend them. This book review, of Adam Chilton and Mila Versteeg's, How Constitutional Rights Matter, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020) celebrates the ambition of empirically assessing, on a global scale, the effectiveness of constitutional rights, and yet queries its assumptions. An important demarcation offered by the authors is between constitutional rights which support (and are defended by) organizations, like churches or trade unions, and constitutional rights which are defended primarily by individuals. As this review explores, some of the authors' findings, particularly on the rise of organizational religious freedom rights, are important for conceiving of the effectiveness of the constitutional rights of those who practice majority versus minority religions. Others, such as the assessment of the effectiveness of constitutional economic and social rights (as measured by expenditure), require a more extensive engagement with empirical human rights measurement and welfare state studies. In both cases, the task of assessing causal mechanisms for how constitutional rights matter, while controlling for the wealth of a country, its population size, its democratic status, whether it is engaged in war, its judicial independence, and its regime durability (for civil and political rights); and its economic growth, inflation, population age, and urban population (for economic and social rights), remains intriguing. Drawing on previous findings of collective action and coordination problems is a fruitful start.

This article is devoted to the study of the constitutional foundations of antitrust regulation. As an subject for this study, the authors have chosen the rules of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the constitutions of foreign countries (USA, Western Europe), which have served as the source for adopted on their basis legislative acts on the protection of competition and the restriction of monopolistic activity in commodity markets. Based on the use of the comparative legal method, the authors have identified five stages of development of the constitutional basis of antitrust regulation, and models of antitrust legislation. The Antimonopoly provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the issues of Antimonopoly regulation are presented. This article discusses the controversial aspects of the topic, the constitutional principles of the state antitrust policy. As a result of this study, the authors have come to the conclusion that the constitutional right to fair competition and protection from unfair competition is one of the social and economic human rights that can be found in the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. ; peer-reviewed

When the Supreme Court decided Sparrow, it could have interpreted s. 35 of the Constitution to give Aboriginal peoples absolute power over Aboriginal and treaty rights, a power which neither Parliament nor the Provinces could trump. Instead, the Court interpreted s. 35 to mean that Parliament could still infringe Aboriginal rights if the infringement could be justified by a strict test. Professor McNeil suggests that this interpretation does not originate in the constitutional text so much as in the British constitutional concepts of Parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law. He argues that the Court maintained Parliament's power to regulate Aboriginal rights because it combined these constitutional concepts with an assumption that these rights are not effectively regulated by Aboriginal governments and laws. The Court's unarticulated fear was that an intolerable legal vacuum would be created if s. 35 was interpreted as excluding all federal regulatory power. The author argues, however, that to decolonize Canadian constitutional law, we must redefine Parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law to include Aboriginal governments and laws, which could fill the constitutional space that s. 35 provided and avoid the vacuum that the Court feared.