Search results

This study is devoted to analysing the structural decisions related to the administrative jurisdiction in Germany in comparison with other European countries. It focuses, in particular, on the institutional structure of the administrative jurisdiction and the functions associated with it to it. Different understanding of the scope of the administrative jurisdiction pre-determine how individual regulations of administrative procedural law are designed, for example, regulations concerning access to courts and the judicial powers of the administrative courts. Therefore, the article aims to demonstrate – from a comparative legal perspective – the processes of mutual interaction, namely how the structural decisions made about the administrative jurisdiction have been received, and to highlight the different developmental trends characteristic of individual countries. ; pracowanie poświęcone jest analizie decyzji strukturalnych dotyczących sądownictwa administracyjnego w Niemczech na tle innych krajów europejskich. Koncentruje się w szczególności na strukturze instytucjonalnej sądownictwa administracyjnego i związanych z nim funkcjach. Odmienne rozumienie zakresu sądownictwa administracyjnego przesądza o kształcie poszczególnych przepisów administracyjnego prawa procesowego, np. regulacji dotyczących dostępu do sądów i kompetencji orzeczniczej sądów administracyjnych. Dlatego niniejszy artykuł ma na celu ukazanie – z perspektywy prawnoporównawczej – procesów wzajemnego oddziaływania, czyli sposobu przyjęcia decyzji strukturalnych dotyczących sądownictwa administracyjnego oraz zwrócenie uwagi na różne tendencje rozwojowe charakterystyczne dla poszczególnych krajów.

This study is devoted to analysing the structural decisions related to the administrative jurisdiction in Germany in comparison with other European countries. It focuses, in particular, on the institutional structure of the administrative jurisdiction and the functions associated with it to it. Different understanding of the scope of the administrative jurisdiction pre-determine how individual regulations of administrative procedural law are designed, for example, regulations concerning access to courts and the judicial powers of the administrative courts. Therefore, the article aims to demonstrate – from a comparative legal perspective – the processes of mutual interaction, namely how the structural decisions made about the administrative jurisdiction have been received, and to highlight the different developmental trends characteristic of individual countries. ; Opracowanie poświęcone jest analizie decyzji strukturalnych dotyczących sądownictwa administracyjnego w Niemczech na tle innych krajów europejskich. Koncentruje się w szczególności na strukturze instytucjonalnej sądownictwa administracyjnego i związanych z nim funkcjach. Odmienne rozumienie zakresu sądownictwa administracyjnego przesądza o kształcie poszczególnych przepisów administracyjnego prawa procesowego, np. regulacji dotyczących dostępu do sądów i kompetencji orzeczniczej sądów administracyjnych. Dlatego niniejszy artykuł ma na celu ukazanie – z perspektywy prawnoporównawczej – procesów wzajemnego oddziaływania, czyli sposobu przyjęcia decyzji strukturalnych dotyczących sądownictwa administracyjnego oraz zwrócenie uwagi na różne tendencje rozwojowe charakterystyczne dla poszczególnych krajów.

Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) is often used to illustrate differences in intensity of environmental externalities creation under various jurisdictions. From the point of view of environment exploitation those jurisdictions are usually arbitrary. As a result conclusions drawn from them may be incorrect and public policy based on them inaccurate (e.g. the territory where environmental regulations are applied does not match with the territory where they are needed). As a consequence, predictions based on statistical interpretation of EKC are unreliable and the policy based on them proves to be inefficient. Therefore, it seems that EKC should be used for predictions only for large jurisdictions or groups of jurisdictions.

The Arctic region has been the focus of considerable attention in recent years, often concerned with maritime claims and an alleged race for the region's resources. Against this narrative, the article focuses on the practices of Canada and the Russian Federation with respect to their maritime jurisdictional claims and the delimitation of maritime boundaries with their Arctic neighbours. The article provides an overview of the Arctic region and the international law of the sea with an emphasis on the baselines and maritime claims of the Arctic coastal states. Discussion then turns to the maritime boundary agreements that have been concluded in the Arctic region before overlapping claims to areas of continental shelf underlying the central part of the Arctic Ocean are appraised. The article concludes that Canada and the Russian Federation have enjoyed considerable success in resolving overlapping maritime claims and their pragmatic and innovative approaches coupled with existing regional cooperation bode well for finding peaceful solutions to Arctic Ocean governance challenges in the future.

Negotiations are ongoing to develop an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). If adopted, the ILBI will likely apply to parts of the Arctic Ocean where the Arctic Council has played an important role for ocean governance. This begs the question of what role the Arctic Council will play vis-à-vis a future ILBI, which is envisioned to "not undermine existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies" (UN General Assembly Resolution 72/249). Against this backdrop, this article reflects on the future relationship between the Arctic Council and the ILBI. In so doing, the article initially discusses possible meanings of the notion of not undermining and, more broadly, how the ILBI will likely determine its institutional relationship with relevant bodies for BBNJ. Based on that, the article provides a short overview of the role of the Arctic Council in Arctic Ocean governance and explores whether the Arctic Council would qualify as a relevant regional body that shall not be undermined by the future ILBI.

Adjusting the legal status, and support policies for migrant workers is an issue on the agenda of international institutions for nearly a hundred years. The first efforts to protect foreign workers have been taken during the first session of the International Labour Conference in 1919. In the following decades ILO activities has led to the preparation of three international documents concerning this issue (non-binding ILO Convention No. 66 in 1939, and Convention No. 97 of 1949, and No. 143 of 1975). For many decades, the problem of the protection and assistance of migrant workers' rights was considered as a narrow issue of international labor law. Codification efforts, undertaken during seventies, has led to the adaptation of the UN document (International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families) in 1990, and inclusion this issue into more general area of international human rights law. Despite this fact, and the existence of several categories of documents concerning migrant workers within Council of Europe, the European Union, and even ASEAN, the protection of migrant workers has never been effectively functioning system. The aim of this article is the analysis of the codification of that issue, and the main obstacles to consensus on the protection of migrant workers' rights. The state parties of the UN Convention contains primarily countries of origin of migrants (such as Mexico, Morocco and the Philippines). It seems, therefore, that despite 46 ratifications the, UN convention does not have a global character, and activities of its monitoring body (Committee on Migrant Workers-CMW) reflects primarily demands of sending countries. The article closely examines particularly controversial provisions of the ILO and UN documents from the point of view of current labour migrations and policies of sending and host countries.

This book explores the issue of environmentally-induced migrations from the point of view of international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international refugee law and international law of statelessness. Last few years have become a period of unprecedented growth in the number of studies devoted to the forced migration caused by climate change. The book by professor Jane McAdam, published by Oxford University Press, differs significantly from previous studies in this area. The focus of the author became a state responsibility for the situation of climate-change induced displaced people with a particular focus on legal aspects of this problem. The basis of the author`s considerations are four particular areas of public international law: international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international refugee law and international law of statelessness. The issue of climate change-induced displacement is now becoming a growing challenge for public international law. The growing number of climate change migrants becomes a challenge for the international istitutions dealing with humanitarian assistance. Sea level rise become a factor of specific legal problems, such as climatic deterritorialization of the state, state succession on the new territory, the status of people forced to leave their country submerged under the waters of ocean (forced migrants?, refugees?, stateless people?, citizens of the former country continuing its status within a new territory?).

On 1 April 2020, the Latvian fishing company SIA North Star and its owner Peteris Pildegovics initiated an investor-State arbitration against Norway (Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway) at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). This case is not only Norway's first ever ICSID case, but also the first publicly known investor-State arbitration in which an operator of a fishing vessel has brought a claim against a coastal State for allegedly unlawful exercise of prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction in relation to fisheries. The case raises intricate questions concerning the limits of jurisdiction ratione materiae and jurisdiction ratione personae of investment tribunals.

Z opodatkowaniem wiążą się nie tylko złożone problemy prawne, lecz także etyczne. Uwidaczniają się one w procesie stosowania przepisów prawa. Zdarza się, że prawo podatkowe przeradza się w swoje przeciwieństwo, gdy rygoryzm w wykonywaniu litery prawa przestaje się liczyć z kontekstem społecznym. Właśnie wtedy, z uwagi na złośliwe tłumaczenie prawa (Cyceron), szczególna rola przypada sędziom sądu administracyjnego.Ochrona przed bezprawnym działaniem organów podatkowych wynika z wysokiej wiedzy interpretacyjnej sędziów, sędziowskiej dociekliwości i wnikliwości, moralnej wrażliwości sędziów na prawo, solidności kontroli instancyjnej.Pojawia się też problem relacji norm etycznych wywodzących się z wartości aksjologicznych do norm prawnych. Te relacje są następujące: normy prawne powinny posiadać legitymację aksjologiczną, natomiast normy etyczne legitymacji jurydycznej nie potrzebują. A to oznacza, że niesporne wartości aksjologiczne (dobro, godność, sprawiedliwość, równość, wolność) obowiązują niezależnie od umownie przyjętych w danym czasie konwencji stanowienia prawa. Zawsze więc stają się częścią systemu prawa w państwie. Prawo pozytywne jest wynikiem kompromisu sił politycznych i sił społecznych, które w życiu publicznym odgrywają istotną, ważną rolę. Dlatego też prawo pozytywne nie może być pełnym odbiciem uniwersalnych wartości aksjologicznych. I stąd właśnie pochodzą różnice zakresów pomiędzy obowiązującym systemem prawa a systemem norm etycznych wynikających z uniwersalnych wartości aksjologicznych. ; Taxation is not only associated with complex legal problems but also with ethical ones which become apparent in the process of applying legal regulations. When the rigorous application of the letter of the law ignores the social context taxation law degenerates into its opposite. In such situations, owing to malicious legal explanations (Cicero), a vital role is played by the judges of the administrative courts.Protection against the unlawful actions of tax institutions derives from the great interpretative knowledge of the judges, their inquisitiveness and insight, their moral sensitivity to legal issues as well as the soundness of the control processes of the courts.The problem arises here of the relationship between ethical norms which derive from axiological values and legal norms. This relationship can be defined as follows: legal norms ought to have axiological legitimacy but ethical norms do not require judicial legitimacy. This means that undisputedaxiological values (such as good, dignity, justice, equality, freedom) are valid independently of the legal conventions of law making applying at a given time. They are always incorporated into the legal system of a state. Positive law is a consequence of a compromise between the political and social forces which play an important and vital role in public life. This is why positive law cannot be a full reflection of universal axiological values. This explains why there are differences of scope between the legal system in force and the system of ethical norms which derive from universal axiological values.