Suchergebnisse

Legal ignorance typically refers to a situation where one is ignorant of the existence of a certain legal prescript or is ignorant of the precise understanding of a prescript or its consequences.
In Belgian law, there is no general provision dealing with legal ignorance or its effects. In principle, one cannot escape the application of law based on the mere fact that one does not know the law or its consequences. However, in specific situations Belgian law and case law deviate from this basic principle, provided that strict conditions are fulfilled.
The authors of this article report on the application of the concept of legal ignorance in the areas of contract law, tort law and prescription.
As for contract law, the article examines whether a mistake as to the law may qualify as an excusable error leading to the nullification of a contract. Although the Cour de Cassation applies a very strict interpretation and states that mere legal ignorance cannot be an excusable error, some lower courts seem to apply a more lenient interpretation. In tort law, the starting point remains that mere legal ignorance is not excusable. To escape liability despite the infringement of a specific rule, one will have to overcome the difficult task of proving that the mistake was 'unavoidable'. Lastly, the general provision for prescription periods does not deal explicitly with the issue of legal ignorance. In principle it is not necessary that the person subject to prescription is aware of the fact that the prescription started to run. In specific situations, some statues and case law deviate from this principle.

This paper presents the findings of a research study carried out with those who educate educators (teachers). One of the themes addressed are the social representations (SR) that teachers have of the application of the legal bases that have sustained teacher training in Argentina throughout history and which continue to underlie this training in the present day. We look at both the changes and continuities and their link to current educational practice. The methodology used was qualitative (documentary analysis, lexicometric analysis, hierarchical evocations). We established Nodes, categories and subcategories of analysis that reveal which aspects make up the core of teachers' SR and which are peripheral. Our findings – which do not coincide with the devalued images of teachers presented by the media, clouded by frequent claims by society – could orient transformations from the political, decision-making sector that would seek to improve practices and recover, precisely, the legal bases and their evolution up to the present day. ; Fil: Aparicio, Miriam Teresita. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Filosofia y Letras; Argentina. Universidad Catolica de Cuyo - Sede San Juan; Argentina ; Fil: Fraca, Carina Silvia. Universidad Católica de Cuyo - Sede San Juan. Facultad de Ciencias Médicas; Argentina

This paper explores the constitutional dimension of comparative criminal law procedure in a European context. It does so by focusing on the European civil law traditions and by explaining how the impact of constitutional law reasoning has changed the criminal law landscape. The paper argues that the influence of European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights regime together with other comparative law effects have led to an adapted version of the comparative law project, where the orthodox distinction between civil law and common law is largely erased. Specifically, the paper focuses on the question of fairness and justification in the criminal law process, the principle of proportionality and the notion of dignity in a comparative perspective. The paper draws on both doctrinal and theoretical examples.

Reviewing: Antje du Bois-Pedain, Magnus Ulva ng and Petter Asp (eds.), Criminal Law and the Authority of State, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2017, 252 pp. ; Although the notion of state, its attributes and its role in public life has been a subject of perennial and constant discussion, one could argue that the very function and objective of the state is the creation and maintenance of peace and safety of subjects under its dominion. In fulfilling these essential functions the state enjoys various sovereign rights, which, inter alia, include put in Hobbesian terms, the potestas coactive, i.e. the power to impose punishments, and the gladium iustitiae, the power to carry out punishments.1 And since at least the paradigm shift carried out by Hobbes claimed to be the founder of modern political philosophy, ''the philosophical justification of the political system and the law is no longer accomplished by relating the existing order and the law as practiced to their ontological basis. Instead, the state and the law are analytically de-constructed and reconstituted with a view to the specific goal of creating peace and security for the individual […]''.2 In line with this tradition of rational construction of state's authority, Max Weber provided the most influential definition of the modern state: ''a state is that human community which (successfully) lays claim to the monopoly of legitimate physical violence within a certain territory […]''.3 Thus, legitimacy of the state authority, that is, the legitimate use of power including ius puniendi is without doubt one of the central themes of modern political philosophy and jurisprudence. In the footsteps of this tradition, the present collection of essays brings together criminal lawyers, criminologists, legal theorists and public lawyers who, in a wide variety of ways, address the question how the modern liberal state relates to those under its jurisdiction through the criminal law (p. 1). In the engaging introductory chapter, the editors emphasise the fact that the required exchange between criminal lawyers and public lawyers has been neglected so far, and they argue that the separation of different discourses on the legitimacy of criminal law, public law, criminal law theory and sociologically oriented criminal justice scholarship is problematic as it now stands. Such a dialogue among various discourses and scholarly approaches is not only desired but also required on the face of the fact that the criminal law in most instances wreaks such havoc in people's lives and the criminal punishment is such an extraordinary abomination, that it patently needs all the justificatory help it can get.

The legislator specifies the general conditions that shall be fulfilled by any candidate desired to be a civil servant. One of those conditions is that the candidate shall not be convicted of any felony or misdemeanor relates to public morals. This is a qualification condition, where it shall continue in its existence for the continuation of being a civil servant, otherwise the civil servant's job shall automatically end and by the force of law. The civil servant is discharged, and his legal relationship is ended, once he is convicted by a court that has jurisdiction of any felony or misdemeanor relates to public morals. Consequently, since the criminal decisions against civil servants varies, where some would execute the penalty and other would hinder the execution, this research deals with the effect of those criminal decisions on civil servant's legal relationship with the state. Therefore, the question that might arise is whether all of those criminal decisions would lead to the termination of the employment relationship or only some would lead to such result?

What is trust? A social science perspective -- Institutional architecture of EU criminal law : mutual recognition as the 'cornerstone of judicial cooperation in criminal matters -- The 'flagship' mutual recognition instrument : the European arrest warrant and trust issues -- The court of justice of the European Union and the evolution of mutual trust -- Mutual trust in the EU criminal law discourse : from confidence to doubt -- The trust-building policy : an orchestrated effort or a patchwork of measures? -- Critical development of the principle of mutual trust : a work in progress -- A transatlantic perspective : trust lessons from a federal context -- Unpacking the principle of mutual trust : five building blocks -- A forward-looking assessment of mutual trust challenges.

AbstractThis article analyses the interaction between the application of mutual recognition in criminal matters and the right to liberty. The main argument is that the current content of the right to liberty in EU law is unsuitable for mutual recognition procedures. As for the structure of this article, firstly, the main features of mutual recognition as a method of inter-state cooperation in criminal matters are outlined. Secondly, the approach of the European Union (especially the Court of Justice) to the right to liberty is clarified. Thirdly, four mutual recognition instruments are analysed in light of the right to liberty: namely, the Framework Decisions on the European Arrest Warrant; the Transfer of Prisoners; the Probation Measures; and the European Supervision Order (ESO). The assessment confirms that the higher level of automaticity in judicial cooperation introduced by mutual recognition requires a rethink of the existing understanding of the right to liberty in EU law.

The book is the result of the conference "Substantive Criminal Law of the European Union" organised by the Criminal Law Department of Maastricht University on 20 and 21 January 2011, with the generous support of the Faculty of Law of Maastricht University, the Koninklijke Nederlandse Academie van Wetenschappen, the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology of Maastricht University and the Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law (HIIL). --

The process of carrying out (serving) a criminal punishment in the form of imprisonment according to the Russian criminal and penal law provides for isolation of the convicted person, limitations of rights and certain freedoms, as well as using corrective measures to change the criminal orientation of that person towards positive law-abiding behavior. According to penal law, the corrective process is being implemented by carrying out the main measures of corrective action, which the law lists as: regulated conditions, socially useful labor, educational work, general and professional education, and social influence.

Currently the penal system sees a general trend of reducing the total number of imprisoned persons. According to the statistics by the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, 880 thousand people were serving a prison sentence in 2010, 550 thousand people in 2016, as of 1 June 2018 that number was 520.5 thousand people, and as of 1 May 2019 it was 552,188 persons. In the recent years, the number of prisoners tends to stay on the same level. These numbers testify to the continued humanization of the criminal and penal policy of the Russian Federation, as well as to the results of applying corrective actions to those sentenced to imprisonment.