Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe question of constitutionalization cuts through the heart of theoretical debate on the fragmentation of global governance. This paper aims to contribute to this debate through a comparison of global administrative law (GAL) and the conflicts-law approach. While the conflicts-law approach espouses the move towards global constitutionalism, GAL disavows constitutional ambition. I make a twofold argument. First, the differing diagnoses these two approaches make of global governance lead to their distinct proposed solutions. GAL identifies the lack of accountability as the underlying concern of global governance and responds to fragmented global governance through balancing-centred legal management. The conflicts-law approach instead attributes the challenges facing global governance to the ill-designed democratic institutions in nation states and turns to 'democratic juridification' as the solution. Second, GAL and the conflicts-law approach reflect two distinct images of constitutionalism. GAL's 'constitutional deficit' suggests its implicit embrace of a version of constitutionalism rooted in the tradition of populist democracy. The conflicts-law approach situates transnational democracy in the conflicts-law process in which inter-regime conflicts are resolved, suggesting a prototype of constitutionalized global governance underpinned by an epistemic understanding of democracy.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 (CRC) is incorporated in Norwegian law by the Human Rights Act. This chapter explores and analyse the legislative effect of this legal incorporation. It provides an overview of legislative amendments that the CRC has catalysed and cases in the Norwegian Supreme Court in which the CRC has been invoked. In several judgments, the CRC has been a central issue and the Court has divided over its interpretation. Drawing on the CRC committee's concluding observations, the chapter also reflects on contemporary challenges in the implementation of CRC in the Norwegian legal system. ; publishedVersion

The question of the caliphate or imamate and similarly that of the mutʿa marriage (Imāmīs) are generally seen as the deepest differences distinguishing Shīʿī law systems from those of the remaining law schools. Inheritance law, however, reveals an additional range of Shīʿī idiosyncrasies: the division of heirs by kin into classes, certain privileges of the eldest son, and certain disadvantages of wives with respect to some goods in their husband's estates. From a historical point of view, the analysis of these cases leads to some innovative conclusions about the origin and development of Imāmi and Ismaʿīlī doctrine, the influence of political elements on the law system, the question of the authenticity of the Zaydī Majmūʿ al-fiqh, and the dominance of practical considerations over strict legal rules.

This paper1 considers how social justice influences EU financial consumer law. It provides a new way of looking at social justice in consumer law by showing that equality of status based social justice has increasingly come to the fore in modern EU financial consumer law. This emergent and complex set of private and regulatory rules on credit, insurance, investment and payment products has responded to the consequences of inequality between financial firms and consumers by engaging in product and rights regulation that balances the parties' rights and duties and protects consumers from the consequences of status-based inequality. Looking forward the paper recommends that this social justice approach must be made transparent and become an express part of EU law and policy, both in order to raise consumer trust in the internal market and to more clearly set the future law and policy agenda.

The COVID-19 crisis has ended and upended lives around the globe. In addition to killing over 160,000 people, more than 35,000 in the United States alone, its secondary effects have been as devastating. These secondary effects pose fundamental challenges to the rules that govern our social, political, and economic lives. These rules are the domain of lawyers. Law in the Time of COVID-19 is the product of a joint effort by members of the faculty of Columbia Law School and several law professors from other schools. This volume offers guidance for thinking about some the most pressing legal issues the pandemic has raised, especially (though not exclusively) for law in the United States: from the rights of prison inmates who live under conditions that make them exceptionally vulnerable to the highly contagious virus to the options for contracting parties who now face circumstances that make it impossible for them to live up to their past commitments. The book does not give legal advice. Instead, it identifies critical legal issues that affect many peoples' lives, offers fresh perspectives for thinking about those issues, and provides guidance to legislatures and policy makers about the legal challenges ahead. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1239/thumbnail.jpg

Abstract
While there is a growing jurisprudence in the field of art (aesthetics) and international law, there is still space to theorise about the philosophical approach that we choose when we decide to engage the discipline as an artistic endeavour. In this article I argue that an aesthetic conception of international law can help go past the limitations imposed by rationalist accounts of legal order by thinking of it as an experience rather than a social science. This subjective shift in emphasis does not have to commit to a preordained theory of how international law is meant to look like, but rather focuses on the manner in which international lawyers engage with their discipline. I conclude by arguing that international law is not a naturally occurring phenomenon which exists in the empirical world and which we pick out by our senses – it is a human artefact constructed through our involvement with reality. This allows for many argumentative possibilities, and it is by the action of choosing these possibilities that we define the boundaries of what international law is.

The globalization of private international trade law, or the Modern Law Merchant (Lex Mercatoria), is said to revive the medieval tradition of common law & serves to provide a source of global governance in an increasingly pluralistic legal order. The nature & operation of the Modern Law Merchant as a juridical link between local & global political economies is analyzed. It is argued that this system of governance does not provide the much-needed public good of commercial certainty, but instead provides fundamentally private goods that benefit narrow First World interests. Its private governance agreements meet the needs of late, not medieval, capitalism, & of the global mercatocracy, which needs to adjust legal governance to a situation of flexible & transnational capital accumulation & intensified global competition. The idea that there are plural or multiple centers of global authority obscures the unified activities of this central agent & the extension of private international law into a full range of international commerce. M. Pflum