Search results

In an era of increased reliance on private regulatory bodies and globalised economic activity, standardisation is the field where politics, technical expertise and strategic behaviour meet and interact. International standard-setting bodies exemplify the rise of transnational governance and the challenges that it brings about relating to institutional choice, legitimacy, procedural and substantive fairness or transparency. This book takes a more empirical-based approach focusing on the mechanics of international standard-setting. It constitutes a multidisciplinary inquiry into the foundations of international standard-setting, an empirically under-researched yet important area of international informal lawmaking. Contributors expertly examine the peculiarities of international standardisation in selected issue-areas and legal orders and shed light on the attributes of international standard-setters, allowing comparisons among standard-setting bodies with a view to identifying best practices and improve our understanding about standardisation processes.

Since globalization is not only restricted to economic and political relationships, but literally 'hits home', it has become indispensable to look beyond national boundaries and to take international developments into account in the field of family law. Hence, comparative family law is blooming. The core part of this contribution to the special issue on 'Current Debates in Family Law around the Globe' is aimed at framing the context of comparative family law. The main questions are: How is comparative family law perceived by the academic community and practitioners alike? What should it entail? In the attempt to find answers to these questions, several comparative family law projects, which have been carried out both in Europe and in the United States, have been compared. Whereas family law experts in Europe decidedly contribute to the comparative law methodology debate, similar discussions seemingly do not take place in the United States. It has been examined why this may be the case.

As clinical legal education (CLE) continues to evolve and prepare practice-ready lawyers, and governments worldwide focus on the multilayered impact of technology, automation and artificial intelligence, there is a pressing need to examine law and entrepreneurship through the lens of global clinical legal education. The range of issues include: corporate social responsibility, disruptive technologies, microbusiness, social entrepreneurship, social impact investing, the creative economy, sustainable local economies, cooperatives and shared work, and inclusive entrepreneurship.Indeed, new legal entities like benefit corporations and low profit limited liability companies (L3Cs) have emerged to address contemporary legal needs and in the United States, the notion of an entrepreneurial mindset is prominent. Many of today's law students are Millennial generation, ages 18-34, while others are digital natives who have not known a world without technology.Business law clinics (BLCs), also referred to as transactional clinics, representing for profit, nonprofit or nongovernmental (NGOs) organizations and social enterprises aim to support the growth of entrepreneurial ecosystems while promoting social and economic justice. BLCs teach law students substantive law, practical skills and professional values. Indeed, BLCs with a social and economic justice perspective can help law students, the next generation of leaders, to develop critical analytic skills and insights into how entrepreneurship supports and sometimes hurts human rights and civil society efforts.Part one of this article examines the evolution of global CLE in western countries like the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and in Georgia and Croatia. Part two discusses a more recent phenomenon in CLE, the emergence of BLCs, which expand the clinical experience beyond the courtroom to the boardroom, and the differences and similarities between litigation and transactional legal clinics. Part three examines the rise in BLCs globally, and contains case studies of the global experience in transactional CLE with perspectives from Georgia, Croatia, Australia, Canada and the U.K. Part four considers the unique pedagogical and programmatic aspects of BLCs, such as redefining "practice-ready," teaching Millennials, and collaboration as a lawyering skill. Part five reflects on the significance of BLCs now. In Part six the article concludes by looking to the future of BLCs in a global context. The article also includes an Appendix 1 with BLC Lawyering Competencies and Learning Outcomes and Appendix 2 with a Checklist for Starting or Re-Imagining a BLC.

Modern directions of development of administrative law are examined in the article. Priority directions of development of home administrative law are outlined. The separate aspects of transformation of administrative law are determined. It is marked on the native updating of all system of administrative law with taking into account public interests and orientation first of all on providing of rights and freedoms of man and citizen. Changes that took place for the last decades in our country influenced all spheres of vital functions of both the state and society on the whole, not leaving legal science aside, the consequences of influence on that strike the volume and scales. For years independence of Ukraine theoretical and methodological bases of science of administrative law were radically revised taking into account political, social, economic and legal nature of the Ukrainian state, objective conformities to law and tendencies of her historical development. The new doctrine of administrative law directly influences on the process of reformation of administrative law as to the field of law, that is based on confession qualitatively of new role of the state in mutual relations with citizens, ideology is not domination, but service to them. Taking into account resulted estimation of development of science of administrative law on the modern stage determines a necessity and actuality.

The author reflects on his return to the International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry after sitting out a year to protest the Salaita affair. He draws on the experiences of the drive and what it means to once again be face to face with colleagues he admires, doing the work of thinking critically about the pressure of the law on sentences as descriptions of pain, vulnerability, and outrage—staples of autoethnography—become subject to punitive reactions in an increasingly policed state.