Suchergebnisse

The article is devoted to the actual scientific problem - the protection of human rights and freedoms by the judicial authorities, their priority in this process. It provides an analysis of international legal acts, devoted to this problem. It is stressed, that the success of judicial administration in the performance of justice depends on many factors, and especially on the regularity of the procedural form of resolving disputes in court and on the universality of the nature of the "procedural order". Compliance with the procedural guarantees of the administration of justice is a prerequisite for its implementation and proper consideration of court cases. The procedural guarantees of observance of human rights in the administration of justice include: courteousness of the court, transparency, openness of court proceedings, efficiency of justice, participation of the people in its implementation, competition of the parties in court proceedings, etc.Particular attention is paid to the specifics of guarantees of observance of human rights in criminal justice and analysis of normative and legal acts that establish the basic principles and guarantees of observance of human rights and their classification on: international legal acts, constitutional acts (constitutional or basic laws), legislative acts (first of all separate laws and codes).There are two groups of guarantees of the observance of human rights in the administration of justice. These are procedural guarantees, which are almost completely equated with the principles of justice and procedural safeguards for the observance of human rights in the administration of justice. Both of these guarantee groups are closely interrelated and none of them can be effectively applied without the other. However, the second group of guarantees includes a more detailed list of legal rules that already apply to specific cases (order, terms, etc.) in relation to one or another type of legal proceedings.Comparison of the procedural rights of the victim and the accused has been made, and the emphasis has been made on impossibility of limiting the procedural rights of the accused. Unlike civil, administrative and constitutional justice, a characteristic feature of criminal justice is that it guarantees not only at the stage of judicial review, but also at the stages preceding it ; Статья посвящена актуальной научной проблеме - защите прав и свобод человека органами судебной власти, приоритетном их месту в этом процессе. Предоставляется анализ международно-правовых актов посвященных данной проблеме. Отмечается, что успешность выполнения судебной властью функции правосудия зависит от многих факторов, особенно от регламентированности процессуальной формы разрешения споров в суде и на универсальности характера «процессуального порядка». Соблюдение процессуальных гарантий правосудия является необходимым условием его осуществления и правильного рассмотрения судебных дел. К процессуальным гарантиям соблюдения прав человека при отправлении правосудия относятся: беспристрастность суда, гласность, открытость судебного разбирательства, оперативность правосудия, участие народа в его осуществлении, состязательность сторон в судебном разбирательстве и др.Особое внимание уделено специфике гарантий соблюдения прав человека в уголовном судопроизводстве и анализу нормативно-правовых актов, устанавливающих основные принципы и гарантии соблюдения прав человека и их классификации на: международно-правовые акты, конституционные акты (конституционные или основные законы), законодательные акты (прежде всего отдельные законы и кодексы).Существует две группы гарантий соблюдения прав человека при осуществлении правосудия. Это процессуальные гарантии, почти полностью отождествляются с принципами правосудия и процессуальные гарантии соблюдения прав человека при осуществлении правосудия. Обе эти группы гарантий тесно взаимосвязаны и ни одна из них не может эффективно применяться без другой. Однако вторая группа гарантий включает в себя более подробный перечень правовых норм, касающихся уже специфического рассмотрения дел (порядка, сроков и т.д.), относительно того или иного вида судопроизводства.Проведено сравнение процессуальных прав потерпевшего и обвиняемого и сделан упор на невозможности ограничения процессуальных прав обвиняемого. Характерным признаком уголовного судопроизводства в отличие от гражданского, административного и конституционного судопроизводства является то, что в нем эти гарантии действуют не только на стадии судебного разбирательства, но и на стадиях, предшествующих ему ; Стаття присвячена актуальній науковій проблемі – захисту прав і свобод людини органами судової влади, пріоритетному їх місцю в цьому процесі. В ній подається аналіз міжнародно-правових актів присвячена даній проблемі. Наголошено, що успішність виконання судовою владою функції правосуддя залежить від багатьох факторів, а особливо від регламентованості процесуальної форми вирішення спорів в суді та на універсальності характеру «процесуального порядку». Дотримання процесуальних гарантій здійснення правосуддя є необхідною умовою його здійснення та правильного розгляду судових справ. До процесуальних гарантій дотримання прав людини при відправлені правосуддя належать: безпристрасність суду, гласність, відкритість судового розгляду, оперативність правосуддя, участь народу у його здійсненні, змагальність сторін у судовому розгляді та ін.Особлива увага приділена специфіці гарантій дотримання прав людини у кримінальному судочинстві та аналізу нормативно-правових актів, що встановлюють основні принципи та гарантії дотримання прав людини та їх класифікації на: міжнародно-правові акти, конституційні акти (конституційні чи основні закони), законодавчі акти (насамперед окремі закони та кодекси).Існує дві групи гарантій дотримання прав людини при здійсненні правосуддя. Це процесуальні гарантії, які майже повністю ототожнюються з принципами правосуддя та процесуальні гарантії дотримання прав людини при здійсненні правосуддя. Обидві ці групи гарантій є тісно взаємопов'язаними і жодна з них не може ефективно застосовуватись без іншої. Однак друга група гарантій включає в себе більш детальний перелік правових норм, які стосуються вже специфічного розгляду справ (порядку, термінів, тощо), щодо того чи іншого виду судочинства.Здійснено порівняння процесуальних прав потерпілого та обвинуваченого та зроблено наголос на неможливості обмеження процесуальних прав обвинуваченого. Характерною ознакою кримінального судочинства на відміну від цивільного, адміністративного та конституційного судочинства є те, що в ньому ці гарантії діють не лише на стадії судового розгляду, але й на стадіях, які передують йому

The article is devoted to the actual scientific problem - the protection of human rights and freedoms by the judicial authorities, their priority in this process. It provides an analysis of international legal acts, devoted to this problem. It is stressed, that the success of judicial administration in the performance of justice depends on many factors, and especially on the regularity of the procedural form of resolving disputes in court and on the universality of the nature of the "procedural order". Compliance with the procedural guarantees of the administration of justice is a prerequisite for its implementation and proper consideration of court cases. The procedural guarantees of observance of human rights in the administration of justice include: courteousness of the court, transparency, openness of court proceedings, efficiency of justice, participation of the people in its implementation, competition of the parties in court proceedings, etc.Particular attention is paid to the specifics of guarantees of observance of human rights in criminal justice and analysis of normative and legal acts that establish the basic principles and guarantees of observance of human rights and their classification on: international legal acts, constitutional acts (constitutional or basic laws), legislative acts (first of all separate laws and codes).There are two groups of guarantees of the observance of human rights in the administration of justice. These are procedural guarantees, which are almost completely equated with the principles of justice and procedural safeguards for the observance of human rights in the administration of justice. Both of these guarantee groups are closely interrelated and none of them can be effectively applied without the other. However, the second group of guarantees includes a more detailed list of legal rules that already apply to specific cases (order, terms, etc.) in relation to one or another type of legal proceedings.Comparison of the procedural rights of the victim and the accused has been made, and the emphasis has been made on impossibility of limiting the procedural rights of the accused. Unlike civil, administrative and constitutional justice, a characteristic feature of criminal justice is that it guarantees not only at the stage of judicial review, but also at the stages preceding it ; Статья посвящена актуальной научной проблеме - защите прав и свобод человека органами судебной власти, приоритетном их месту в этом процессе. Предоставляется анализ международно-правовых актов посвященных данной проблеме. Отмечается, что успешность выполнения судебной властью функции правосудия зависит от многих факторов, особенно от регламентированности процессуальной формы разрешения споров в суде и на универсальности характера «процессуального порядка». Соблюдение процессуальных гарантий правосудия является необходимым условием его осуществления и правильного рассмотрения судебных дел. К процессуальным гарантиям соблюдения прав человека при отправлении правосудия относятся: беспристрастность суда, гласность, открытость судебного разбирательства, оперативность правосудия, участие народа в его осуществлении, состязательность сторон в судебном разбирательстве и др.Особое внимание уделено специфике гарантий соблюдения прав человека в уголовном судопроизводстве и анализу нормативно-правовых актов, устанавливающих основные принципы и гарантии соблюдения прав человека и их классификации на: международно-правовые акты, конституционные акты (конституционные или основные законы), законодательные акты (прежде всего отдельные законы и кодексы).Существует две группы гарантий соблюдения прав человека при осуществлении правосудия. Это процессуальные гарантии, почти полностью отождествляются с принципами правосудия и процессуальные гарантии соблюдения прав человека при осуществлении правосудия. Обе эти группы гарантий тесно взаимосвязаны и ни одна из них не может эффективно применяться без другой. Однако вторая группа гарантий включает в себя более подробный перечень правовых норм, касающихся уже специфического рассмотрения дел (порядка, сроков и т.д.), относительно того или иного вида судопроизводства.Проведено сравнение процессуальных прав потерпевшего и обвиняемого и сделан упор на невозможности ограничения процессуальных прав обвиняемого. Характерным признаком уголовного судопроизводства в отличие от гражданского, административного и конституционного судопроизводства является то, что в нем эти гарантии действуют не только на стадии судебного разбирательства, но и на стадиях, предшествующих ему ; Стаття присвячена актуальній науковій проблемі – захисту прав і свобод людини органами судової влади, пріоритетному їх місцю в цьому процесі. В ній подається аналіз міжнародно-правових актів присвячена даній проблемі. Наголошено, що успішність виконання судовою владою функції правосуддя залежить від багатьох факторів, а особливо від регламентованості процесуальної форми вирішення спорів в суді та на універсальності характеру «процесуального порядку». Дотримання процесуальних гарантій здійснення правосуддя є необхідною умовою його здійснення та правильного розгляду судових справ. До процесуальних гарантій дотримання прав людини при відправлені правосуддя належать: безпристрасність суду, гласність, відкритість судового розгляду, оперативність правосуддя, участь народу у його здійсненні, змагальність сторін у судовому розгляді та ін.Особлива увага приділена специфіці гарантій дотримання прав людини у кримінальному судочинстві та аналізу нормативно-правових актів, що встановлюють основні принципи та гарантії дотримання прав людини та їх класифікації на: міжнародно-правові акти, конституційні акти (конституційні чи основні закони), законодавчі акти (насамперед окремі закони та кодекси).Існує дві групи гарантій дотримання прав людини при здійсненні правосуддя. Це процесуальні гарантії, які майже повністю ототожнюються з принципами правосуддя та процесуальні гарантії дотримання прав людини при здійсненні правосуддя. Обидві ці групи гарантій є тісно взаємопов'язаними і жодна з них не може ефективно застосовуватись без іншої. Однак друга група гарантій включає в себе більш детальний перелік правових норм, які стосуються вже специфічного розгляду справ (порядку, термінів, тощо), щодо того чи іншого виду судочинства.Здійснено порівняння процесуальних прав потерпілого та обвинуваченого та зроблено наголос на неможливості обмеження процесуальних прав обвинуваченого. Характерною ознакою кримінального судочинства на відміну від цивільного, адміністративного та конституційного судочинства є те, що в ньому ці гарантії діють не лише на стадії судового розгляду, але й на стадіях, які передують йому

112International Court of Justice — Chamber — Ad hoc chamber — Dispute submitted to ad hoc chamber by special agreement — Composition of chamber — Statute of the Court, Article 26 — Views of the parties regarding selection of judges for the chamber — Rules of Court, Article 17 — 1972 amendment of rules — Whether allowing parties too great an influence over the composition of the chamber — Whether system for establishing ad hoc chambers ultra vires the Statute — Whether inconsistent with judicial character of the Court — Effect on State seeking to intervene in case before ad hoc chamber — Whether State applying to intervene must take composition of chamber as it finds itInternational Court of Justice — Intervention — Jurisdiction to determine application to intervene — Case before chamber of the Court — Whether application to intervene to be considered by chamber or full Court — Influence of original parties in determining composition of chamber — Grounds for intervention — Statute of the Court, Article 62 — Requirement that State seeking to intervene show interest of a legal nature — What constitutes interest of a legal nature — General interest in interpretation and application of rules insufficient — Dispute regarding legal regime of waters of the Gulf of Fonseca — Dispute between two out of three riparian States — Legal interest of third State — Whether legal interest extending to possible maritime delimitation — Object of intervention — Jurisdiction — Whether intervening State must establish jurisdictional link with parties — Effects of intervention — Whether intervening State a party to the case — Standing to be heard — Procedure for intervention — Degree of precision required in application to intervene — Whether intervening State bound by decision — Whether decision res judicata for intervening StateInternational Court of Justice — Judges — Appointment — Judges ad hoc — Whether appointed by party or by Court — Death of ad hoc judge — Party nominating successor — Whether order of Court required — Chamber — Composition — Three judges and two ad hoc judges — Selection of judges — Member of chamber continuing to sit after term of office expiredInternational tribunals — In general — Doctrine of res judicata — Disputed decision — Central American Court of Justice — Decision of 1917 in case between El Salvador and Nicaragua — Decision contested by Nicaragua — Whether res judicata between El Salvador and Nicaragua — Effect of decision on third State — Honduras — Effect of decision on subsequent proceedings in International Court of Justice113Rivers — Boundaries — Change in course of river — Avulsion — Effect on boundary — Whether avulsion has occurred — Presumption where contemporary course of river radically different from original courseSea — Historic waters — Gulf of Fonseca — Status as closed sea — Riparian States all successors to Spain — Joint sovereignty over waters of Gulf — Nature of joint sovereignty — Whether divisible by delimitation — Nature of legal regime of joint sovereignty — Whether waters of Gulf internal waters — Three mile belt adjacent to coast not subject to joint sovereignty — Whether territorial waters — Rights of passage through Gulf — Decision of Central American Court of Justice in 1917 — Effect of legal status of Gulf waters on rights in waters outside GulfSea — Bays — Historic bays — Concept of "pluri-State bay" — Gulf of Fonseca — Closing line — Status — Closing line acting as baseline for claims to maritime spaces to seaward of closing lineSea — Territorial waters — Nature of territorial waters — Three mile belt inside Gulf of Fonseca — Whether territorial waters — Status of waters outside three mile belt — Whether possessing characteristics of internal waters — Effect on legal status of waters within three mile belt — Rights of passageState succession — Territory — Principle of uti possidetis juris — Nature and application of principle — Spanish Empire in Central America — Successor States inheriting boundaries of administrative divisions of Spanish Empire — Location of boundaries — Islands — Maritime spaces in Gulf of Fonseca — Effect of succession to Spain on rights in waters of the GulfTerritory — Boundaries — Principles of delimitation — Dispute between States formerly parts of the same colonial empire — Principle of uti possidetis juris — Application — Spanish Empire in Central America — Successor States — Location of boundaries in colonial times — Proof of location of boundaries — Effect of titles to land granted to Indian communities and private individuals — Colonial effectivités — Conduct of States since independence — Relevance in establishing location of uti possidetis juris line — Acquiescence, recognition and estoppel — Principles to be followed in delimitation where location of uti possidetis juris line cannot be discovered — Relevance of arguments relating to settlement of territory — Relevance of equitable considerations — Disparity between population density and natural resources of adjoining States114Territory — Islands — Sovereignty over islands — Whether in dispute — Nature of dispute — States claiming islands by virtue of succession to single colonial empire — Attribution of islands to administrative divisions of former colonial empire unclear — Application of principle uti possidetis juris — Effect of conduct of States since independence — Small island — Whether capable of acquisition — Whether dependency of larger islandTerritory — Sovereignty — Principle of uti possidetis juris — Conclusion that no land in area had status of terra nullius — General principles of sovereignty over territoryTreaties — Interpretation — Principles of interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Articles 31 and 32 — Emphasis on interpretation in good faith in accordance with ordinary meaning of terms — Context — Recourse to travaux préparatoires — Subsequent practice of partiesWar and armed conflict — Peace treaty — General Treaty of Peace between El Salvador and Honduras, 1980 — Interpretation — Boundary provisions — Recourse to Chamber of International Court of Justice

International law in general — Sources — Diplomatic law — Evolution of — Contrasted with other aspects of international law Relevance of universal sourcesStates as international persons — Succession of governments — Upon termination of a rebellion — Regime overthrown by revolution — Revolutionary government bound by treaties entered into by predecessor — Whether special allowance should be made for revolutionary circumstancesState responsibility — Nature and kind of State responsibility — For breaches of treaty obligations — Effect of breaches of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, and Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 by receiving State — International responsibility — Whether responsibility in any way mitigated by alleged activities of diplomatic mission and policies of sending States — Duty to end continuing breach — Duty make reparationState responsibility — Nature and kinds of State responsibility — For Wrong unconnected with contractual obligations — Acts and omissions of State officials — Executive action inaction — Seizure of embassy and diplomatic staff by rioters — Security forces taking no to steps to prevent seizure — Whether State responsible for failure to protect embassy — Subsequent approval of rioters' actions — Whether state responsible for continued detention of staff as hostagesState responsibility — Nature and kinds of State responsibility — For wrongs unconnected with contractual obligations — Acts of insurgents, rioters and private individuals in general — Seizure of embassy and diplomatic staff by rioters — Whether imputable to State — Seizure following inflammatory statements by members of Government — Subsequent Government approval of seizure and continued detention of hostages by rioters — Rioters as "agents" of the StateState responsibility — Damage — Award of damage in general — Violation of treaty obligations leading to injury — Duty to make reparationThe individual in international law — Extradition — In general — Demands by revolutionary government for extradition of deposed ruler — Taking of diplomatic hostages in support of demandDiplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Permanent diplomatic envoys — Position and functions of diplomatic envoys — Duty of receiving State to protect envoys and their staff in the discharge of their functions — Function of gathering information by lawful means — Difference between this function and espionage — Duty of non — interference in the affairs of the receiving State — Sanctions for violation of this duty — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, Articles 9, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 39 and 41Diplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Permanent diplomatic envoys — Privileges and immunities — Subordinate members of the diplomatic staff — Entitlement to protection in discharge of functions — Inviolability and immunity from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Articles 22, 29, 30 and 31Diplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Permanent diplomatic envoys — Privileges and immunities — Diplomatic premises — Inviolability of diplomatic premises, property, archives and documents — Seizure of hostages on diplomatic premises — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Articles 22 and 24Diplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Consuls — Position and functions of consuls — Consular function of assisting nationals — Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963Diplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Consuls — Privileges and immunities of consuls — Inviolability of consuls and consular premises, archives and documents — Immunity of consular staff from jurisdiction — Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963Diplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Miscellaneous — Members of embassy's technical and administrative staff — Entitlement to diplomatic privileges and immunities — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, Article 1 (d) and 37 (2)Treaties — Termination — By act of party — Non-performance by one party — Acts allegedly inconsistent with Treaty of Amity — Whether debarring State responsible from relying on Treaty in respect of matters taking place prior to these actsInternational organization and administration — The United Nations — The Security Council — Dispute referred to Security Council and International Court of Justice — Whether Court entitled to hear case — Whether appropriate for Court to indicate interim measures of protection — Different roles of Court and Security Councillntemational organization and administration — The United Nations — Other Organs — Secretary — General of the United Nations — Whether appropriate for International Court of Justice to adjudicate upon dispute in respect of which the Secretary — General has established a fact — finding commission — Different roles of Court and commissionDisputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Competence — Unilateral application to Court — Whether Court possessing jurisdiction under Optional Protocols to Vienna Conventionon Diplomatic and Consular Relations — Whether Court possessing jurisdiction under treaty which does not expressly provide for unilateral application — Application allegedly referring only to one part of wider dispute — Whether Court may consider that part alone — Whether appropriate for Court to hear case which is also being considered by Security Council and in respect of which the Secretary — General of the United Nations has established a factfinding commission — Difference between adjudication and mediation — Justiciability of disputeDisputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Procedure — Absence of Respondent State from proceedings Indication of provisional measures — Responsibility of Court to protect interests of both parties when indicating provisional measures — Scope of provisional measures — Inevitability of overlap with claim on the meritsDisputes — Conciliation — Fact — finding commission — Complementary roles of commission and International Court of JusticeDisputes — Unilateral means of redress short of war — Economic sanctions — Attempt to rescue hostages by military operation — Legality — Effect of these measures upon consideration of taking of hostages by International Court — Whether calculated to undermine respect for judicial process — Whether legitimate self — defenceDisputes — Negotiation — Complementary roles of negotiation and adjudication in settlement of dispute — Whether International Court should encourage negotiation by advising parties as to form and content of negotiationsDiplomatic and consular intercourse and privileges — Permanent diplomatic envoys — Privileges and immunities of diplomatic envoys and their staff — Members of technical and administrative staff — Inviolability of diplomatic staff — Immunity from criminal proceedings — Duty of receiving State to protect members of diplomatic staff in the discharge of diplomatic functions — Diplomatic premises — Inviolability of diplomatic premises, archives and documents — Duty of receiving State to protect — Seizure of embassy and taking of diplomatic hostages — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961503Consuls — Privileges and immunities of consular staff and premises — Duty of receiving State to protect — Consular function of assisting nationals — Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963Nature of diplomatic and consular law — Importance in the international community — Contributions made to development of diplomatic law by all States and streams of legal thought — Diplomatic law a self-contained body of rules with its own sanctions for cases of abuse — Alleged acts of espionage by members of diplomatic staff to be dealt with only in accordance with Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Alleged acts of espionage incapable of justifying violation of diplomatic immunityState responsibility — For acts of rioters — Rioters seizing embassy after inflammatory statements by members of Government — Action not imputable to State — Government subsequently approving rioters' acts and encouraging detention of hostages — Rioters becoming agents of State — Violation of treaty obligations — Whether engaging international responsibility of State — Duty to make reparationInternational Court of Justice — Competence — Optional Protocols to Vienna Convention on Diplomatic and Consular Relations — Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights, 1955, between United States and Iran — Indication of provisional measures of protection — Scope of such measures — Whether fact that dispute under consideration by United Nations Security Council debars Court from pronouncing upon it — Establishment of fact-finding commission by United Nations Secretary-General — Whether Court precluded from considering application because it represents only one aspect of a disputeUnilateral action by Applicant — Economic sanctions — Military operation in attempt to rescue hostages — Whether undermining respect for judicial process — Whether affecting legality of initial actions by RespondentTreaties — Breach — Whether hostile acts by Applicant prevent it from relying upon compromissory clause in Treaty of Amity

[spa] La presente tesis doctoral contiene un análisis del régimen jurídico de la reestructuración y resolución de entidades de crédito y los problemas que plantea la intervención por parte de los poderes públicos en relación con una actividad tan central y sensible en para la economía como es la bancaria. Tras la crisis financiera vivida en los últimos años (2008-2017) se han puesto en marcha diferentes mecanismos tanto a nivel europeo como estatal que han configurado un régimen complejo a dos niveles. El principio de precaución, entendido como previsión permanente del riesgo, informa un nuevo régimen de intervención por parte de los poderes públicos en las entidades de crédito que persigue evitar precautoriamente que las situaciones de crisis en estas entidades afecten de manera negativa al conjunto de la economía, dado el carácter global e interconectado de la misma, y a los propios depositantes y clientes. La tesis parte de un estudio de la evolución histórica de la regulación pública en materia de entidades de crédito en nuestro país a fin de comprender las particularidades de la intervención de la Administración pública en esta materia. Tras ello, lleva a cabo un estudio de los presupuestos y los nuevos mecanismos de control e intervención europeos que resultan de la cesión de potestades por parte de organismos públicos estatales a otros supranacionales. El paradigma regulatorio es la administrativización plena de los mecanismos de redireccionamiento y, en su caso, liquidación que en cualquier otro orden económico se resolverían en el contexto de la legislación concursal de carácter mercantil. Bajo este prisma, la tesis analiza el régimen jurídico de las facultades que ostentan los poderes públicos -incluida la potestad sancionadora- que acompaña los supuestos de recuperación, reordenación y resolución de entidades, así como los límites y los mecanismos de control -no siempre satisfactorios- establecidos para atemperar la discrecionalidad administrativa que caracteriza el ejercicio de potestades administrativas en esta materia. A pesar de los grandes avances que el contexto de crisis ha propiciado en materia de supervisión e intervención sobre las entidades de crédito, y del esfuerzo de armonización asumido por las instituciones de la Unión Europea para la homogeneización del régimen de supervisión y resolución, la tesis constata lo mucho que queda por hacer, poniendo de relieve que estamos solo ante el inicio de lo que probablemente será una verdadera Unión Bancaria Europea. ; [cat] La present tesi doctoral conté una anàlisi del règim jurídic de la reestructuració i resolució d'entitats de crèdit i els problemes que planteja la intervenció per part dels poders públics en relació amb una activitat tan central i sensible per a la economia com és la bancària. Després de la crisi financera viscuda en els darrers anys (2008-2017), s'han posat en marxa diferents mecanismes tant a nivell europeu com estatal que han configurat un règim complex a dos nivells. El principi de precaució, entès com una previsió permanent del risc, informa un nou règim d'intervenció per part dels poders públics sobre les entitats de crèdit que busca evitar amb precaució que les situacions de crisi en aquestes entitats afectin d'una manera negativa al conjunt de la economia, donat el caràcter global i interconnectat de la mateixa, i als propis dipositants i clients. La tesi parteix d'un estudi de l'evolució històrica de la regulació pública en matèria d'entitats de crèdit al nostre país, a la fi de comprendre les particularitats de la intervenció de l'Administració pública en aquesta matèria. Desprès d'això, porta a terme un estudi dels pressuposts i els nous mecanismes de control i intervenció europeus que resulten de la cessió de potestats per part d'organismes públics estatals a d'altres supranacionals. El paradigma regulatori és l'administrativització plena dels mecanismes de redireccionament i, en el seu cas, liquidació que en qualsevol altre ordre econòmic es resoldrien en el context de la legislació concursal de caràcter mercantil. Segons aquest prisma, la tesi analitza el règim jurídic de les facultats que ostenten els poders públics –inclosa la potestat sancionadora– que acompanya els supòsits de recuperació, reordenació i resolució d'entitats, així com els límits i els mecanismes de control –no sempre satisfactoris– establerts per temperar la discrecionalitat administrativa que caracteritza l'exercici de potestats administratives en aquesta matèria. Malgrat els grans avenços que el context de crisi ha propiciat en matèria de supervisió i intervenció sobre les entitats de crèdit, i de l'esforç d'harmonització assolit per les institucions de la Unió Europea per a la homogeneïtzació del règim de supervisió i resolució, la tesi constata que queda molt per fer, posant de relleu que estem només a l'inici del que probablement serà una veritable Unió Bancària Europea. ; [eng] This dissertation contains an analysis of the legal regime of the restructuring and resolution of credit institutions and the problems posed by the public authorities' intervention in relation to an activity as central and sensitive activity for the economy as the Banking. After the recent financial crisis (2008-2017) several mechanisms have been launched both at European and national level, a complex system at two levels has been configured. The precautionary principle, understood as the permanent risk forecasting, informs of a new regime of intervention by public authorities in the credit institutions which aims to prevent that crises situation of those entities will affect negatively the overall economy, given its global and interconnected nature, and that of their depositors and customers. The dissertation is based on a historical evolution of public regulation's study in the field of credit institutions in our country in order to understand the peculiarities of public administration's intervention in this subject. In addition, it conducts a study of budgets and the new European mechanisms for control and intervention resulting from the power transfer by national public entities to other supranational. The regulatory paradigm is the full administrativization of the redirection mechanisms and, if necessary, liquidation which in any other economic order would be solved in the context of the normal insolvency proceedings. According to this prism, this paper examines the legal regime of the powers that hold the public authorities - including the sanctioning power - accompanying assumptions of recovery, restructuring and resolution of entities, as well as the control mechanisms (not always satisfactory) and limits established to moderate the administrative discretion that characterizes the exercise of administrative powers in this subject. Despite the great progress that the crisis context has lead to the field of monitoring and intervention on the credit institutions, and of the harmonization effort taken by the European Union's institutions for the homogenization of the regime of monitoring and resolution, this dissertation confirms that there is still much to be done, emphasizing that we are only at the beginning of what probably will be a true European Banking Union.

Nearly 30 years ago, the first of a series of bills to remove asbestos litigation from the tort system by creating an industry-funded mechanism to administratively pay asbestos claims was introduced into Congress. The need for a legislative fix of asbestos litigation has long been manifest. After many unsuccessful efforts to resolve the asbestos litigation crisis, the Senate is poised to take up consideration of S.852, The Fairness In Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005. This essay is a preliminary effort to present some context for discussion of certain aspects of S.852 and to estimate the costs that may be incurred for resolution of personal injury asbestos claims if S.852 is enacted. To date, over 850,000 individual claimants have filed suit against over 8,400 manufacturers, distributors installers and sellers of asbestos-containing products distributed across most of U.S. industries, as well as against owners of buildings and plants in which asbestos is present, claiming injury from exposure to asbestos. Since each plaintiff sues approximately 60-70 different defendants and bankruptcy trusts, the total number of claims probably numbers in excess of 50,000,000. A number of factors account for the significant impetus to current consideration of legislative proposals that range from limiting compensation available in the tort system to plaintiffs whose injuries meet specified medical and exposure criteria to the creation of an administrative alternative to asbestos and exposure litigation. These factors include: the number of asbestos lawsuits; the almost $80 billion in costs already imposed; an even larger sum projected for future costs; 500,000 jobs lost or not created because of the litigation; the further financial consequences of the litigation's impact on capital markets; and the concern for the integrity of the civil justice system as most recently voiced by a federal judge presiding over the silica MDL proceeding that X-ray readers, diagnosing doctors, screening companies and lawyers were engaged in a scheme to manufacture diagnoses for money. S.852, which is now before the Senate, is the product of an extended and extensive negotiation between a number of stakeholders, including, inter alia, businesses, insurers, labor unions, and lawyers. The bill proposes creation of a $140 billion trust ("Trust Fund") funded mostly by business and insurers, to pay claims that meet the medical and exposure criteria set out in the bill. In this essay, I examine the financial costs, in addition to the $140 billion to be paid into the Trust Fund, which may be incurred to resolve current and future personal injury claims based upon asbestos exposure. In attempting to quantify the costs that "fixing" the asbestos litigation crisis may generate and, in particular, those costs additional to the Trust Fund, I am neither advocating adoption or rejection of S.852 or any other legislative "fix" of the massive civil justice system failure that I describe in this essay. Moreover, though I consider the costs that may be incurred in addition to the Trust Fund to be created if S.852 is enacted, I am not expressing any view as to the likelihood of the bill's passage. To set the stage for my analysis, I first consider the benefits that can be realized by enacting legislation to create an administrative mechanism for resolution of asbestos claims in place of the tort system. I then present a brief history of asbestos litigation, including the development of an entrepreneurial model of claim generation, followed by a brief summary of legislative efforts to fix the asbestos litigation crisis. I then briefly summarize S.852's legislative history and current format. Finally, I consider the costs which contributors to the trust fund may additionally have to bear to resolve personal injury asbestos claims. I identify five such areas of costs: 1. asbestos claims handled and paid over the past thirty months since S.1125 was first discussed; 2. "exigent" claimants who qualify for special treatment under S.852; 3. subrogation and workers' compensation claims; 4. pending lawsuits where evidence has commenced, lawsuits where a final judgment has been entered, and certain settlements; and 5. silica/mixed dust claims. Considering only the costs that I have been able to quantify, my analysis indicates that the costs that defendants and insurers may incur for resolution of personal injury asbestos claims, in addition to the $140 billion to be paid into the Trust Fund, could range from approximately $37 billion to $60 billion. To this should be added the cost of four other exceptions that may impose costs outside the Trust Fund that I have not quantified: (i) trial court verdicts; (ii) cases where the presentation of evidence has commenced; (iii) certain settlements; and (iv) silica claims. Each will add unspecified sums to the cost of resolving personal injury asbestos litigation. The assumptions I have made in quantifying costs and the reports and studies I have relied upon (which I have not attempted to validate), may generate outcomes that are too high or too low. I have set out these costs and acknowledged my inability to quantify certain other costs, however, as an invitation to undertake a similar calculus to those who seek to meaningfully compare the costs of the tort and bankruptcy systems (which I have not attempted to quantify), with the costs that may be incurred for resolution of personal injury asbestos claims if S.852 is enacted.

La Directiva 2013/32/UE contempla tres nociones de país seguro. En primer lugar, la aplicación de la noción de «país de origen seguro» permite al Estado miembro la tramitación de una solicitud de protección internacional de un nacional de ese país a través de un procedimiento acelerado. En segundo lugar, la aplicación de la noción de «tercer país seguro» posibilita que el Estado miembro inadmita una solicitud de protección internacional. Y en tercer lugar, la aplicación de la noción de «tercer país seguro europeo» permite que el Estado miembro no realice, o al menos que no lo haga de forma completa, el examen de la solicitud de protección internacional. Algunos Estados miembros han adoptado listas nacionales de países de origen seguros, e incluso la Comisión ha propuesto que se adopte una lista común europea de países de origen seguros. En todo caso, tanto la práctica convencional, legislativa, administrativa y judicial de los Estados miembros como la aplicación de los acuerdos de readmisión suscritos por la UE deben cumplir con lo dispuesto en la Directiva 2013/32/UE, el CEDH y la jurisprudencia del TEDH. El estudio de la jurisprudencia del TEDH que interpreta y aplica los arts. 2 y 3 del CEDH demuestra la necesidad de realizar un examen completo y ex nunc tanto de las circunstancias imperantes en un determinado Estado como de las circunstancias concretas de la persona objeto de expulsión, antes de proceder a su expulsión. De lo contrario, el establecimiento de una lista atemporal y despersonalizada de países de origen seguros puede colisionar con la jurisprudencia del TEDH. En este sentido, la jurisprudencia de este Tribunal arroja criterios que permiten desarrollar los establecidos en la Directiva 2013/32/UE, con el fin de que la catalogación de un país como seguro descanse en el efectivo respeto de los derechos humanos, uno de los valores sobre los que se fundamenta la UE. ; The Directive 2013/32/EU contemplates three concepts of safe country. First, the application of the concept of "safe country of origin" allows the Member State to process an application for international protection by a national of that country through an accelerated procedure. Second, the application of the concept of "safe third country" makes it possible for the Member State to reject an application for international protection. And third, the application of the concept of "European safe third" country allows the Member State not to carry out, or at least not to do so completely, the examination of the application for international protection. Some Member States have adopted national lists of safe countries of origin, and even the Commission has proposed that a common European list of safe countries of origin be adopted. In any case, both the legislative, administrative and judicial practice of the Member States, as well as the application of readmission agreements signed by the EU, must comply with Directive 2013/32/EU, the ECHR and the ECHR jurisprudence. The study of the ECHR jurisprudence that interprets and applies Arts. 2 and 3 of the ECHR, demonstrates the need for a complete and ex nunc examination of both the prevailing circumstances in a given State and the specific circumstances of the person subject to expulsion, before proceeding with the expulsion. Otherwise, the establishment of a timeless and depersonalized list of safe countries of origin can come into conflict with the ECtHR jurisprudence. In this regard, the jurisprudence of this Court provides criteria that allow the development of those set out in Directive 2013/32/EU, in order that the classification of a country as safe is based on the effective respect of human rights, one of the values on which the EU is founded. ; Este trabajo se ha elaborado en el marco de las actividades de investigación que se desarrollan en la Cátedra Jean Monnet «European Neighbourhood Policy: EU Values and Global Challenges» (599477-EPP-1-2018-ES-EPPJMO-CHAIR).

In this dissertation, I analyse how, in the modern period, the different scientific domains dealing with music were divided, and how, at the same time, musical repertories were organised into a hierarchy. This research, focused on the French case, is based on a socio-historical enquiry and on several sources dating from the beginning of the seventeenth to the mid-twentieth century. Those sources are both manuscript andprinted, and range from administrative documents, scientific and museum archives, conference proceedings and other printed sources related to the Universal Exhibitions, to archives from the publishing sector and other pieces related to the collection and curating of musical instruments, songs and audio recordings. The following methods were mobilised : lexical analysis, textual sociology, databases and historicalethnography.The enquiry emphasizes a configuration of the process of making music a part of national heritage by the French State, which is also a long-term process of social differentiation through the music. Collecting and curating operations of musical objects were initiated by the Second Empire and consolidated by the Third Republic. These operations have contributed to make certain repertories anhistorical, and theserepertories, thus kept in a zone below history, were separated from a « modern » repertory, whose evolution was described first by comparative history of music and then by musicology. This separation is analysed as a symbolic domination system, which was enacted by several administrations (Public Instruction, Trading and Industry, Fine Arts, Colonies), produced and reproduced by different agents commissioned by the State (teachers and professors, academicians, curators, territorial leaders, etc.). The repertories which were « made primitive » during the second half of the nineteenth century were grouped under the generic appellation of « traditional musics » and constituted, in a second time, as objects of predilection for a particular discipline – ethnomusicology – born between 1950 and 1960.Deemed as legitimate for several decades, these learned differentiations are presently interrogated by practitioners of these domains. In this context, this dissertation historicises the emergence of the oppositional couple primitive/civilised, underlying these divisions within the sciences of music and musical repertories, and therefore its ambition is to contribute to these contemporary debates. ; Cette thèse analyse la division moderne des domaines des sciences de la musique et la hiérarchisation des répertoires musicaux qui lui est corrélative. La recherche s'appuie sur une enquête socio-historique menée à partir du cas français et sur plusieurs sources courant du début du XVIIème au milieu du XXème siècle. Elle mobilise des ressources manuscrites et imprimées (documents administratifs, archives savantes et muséales, actes de congrès et autres imprimés issus des Expositions universelles, archives du secteur de l'édition, pièces documentant la collecte et la conservation d'instruments de musique, de chansons et d'enregistrements sonores) qui sont traitées à l'aide de plusieurs méthodes (analyse lexicale, sociologie des textes, bases de données, ethnographie historique).L'enquête met en lumière une configuration de patrimonialisation de la musique pilotée par l'État-nation français, qui participe d'un processus de longue durée de différenciation du social par la musique. Des opérations de collecte et de conservation des objets de musique sont impulsées par le Second Empire et confortées par la Troisième République. Elles concourent à assigner certains répertoires, portés par des populations vivantes, à une anhistoricité – un en-deçà de l'histoire. Ceux-ci sont distingués d'un répertoire « moderne » dont l'histoire comparée de la musique puis la musicologie s'attachent à décrire les progrès. Ce partage est analysé comme un système de domination symbolique institué par plusieurs administrations (Instruction publique, Commerce et Industrie, Beaux-Arts, Colonies), produit et reproduit par différent·e·s agent·e·s mandaté·e·s par l'État (Professeur·e·s, académicien·ne·s, conservateurs et conservatrices, dirigeant·e·s territoriaux). Les répertoires primitivisés au cours de la seconde moitié du XIXème siècle sont regroupés sous l'appellation générique de « musiques de la tradition » et constitués dans un second temps en objets de prédilection d'un domaine disciplinaire – l'ethnomusicologie – qui émerge entre 1950 et 1960.Considérés comme légitimes durant plusieurs décennies, ces différenciations savantes sont aujourd'hui interrogées par les praticien·ne·s de ces domaines. En historicisant l'émergence du couple oppositionnel primitif/civilisé sous-jacent aux divisions des sciences de la musique et des répertoires musicaux, cette thèse voudrait contribuer à nourrir ces débats contemporains.

In this dissertation, I analyse how, in the modern period, the different scientific domains dealing with music were divided, and how, at the same time, musical repertories were organised into a hierarchy. This research, focused on the French case, is based on a socio-historical enquiry and on several sources dating from the beginning of the seventeenth to the mid-twentieth century. Those sources are both manuscript andprinted, and range from administrative documents, scientific and museum archives, conference proceedings and other printed sources related to the Universal Exhibitions, to archives from the publishing sector and other pieces related to the collection and curating of musical instruments, songs and audio recordings. The following methods were mobilised : lexical analysis, textual sociology, databases and historicalethnography.The enquiry emphasizes a configuration of the process of making music a part of national heritage by the French State, which is also a long-term process of social differentiation through the music. Collecting and curating operations of musical objects were initiated by the Second Empire and consolidated by the Third Republic. These operations have contributed to make certain repertories anhistorical, and theserepertories, thus kept in a zone below history, were separated from a « modern » repertory, whose evolution was described first by comparative history of music and then by musicology. This separation is analysed as a symbolic domination system, which was enacted by several administrations (Public Instruction, Trading and Industry, Fine Arts, Colonies), produced and reproduced by different agents commissioned by the State (teachers and professors, academicians, curators, territorial leaders, etc.). The repertories which were « made primitive » during the second half of the nineteenth century were grouped under the generic appellation of « traditional musics » and constituted, in a second time, as objects of predilection for a particular discipline – ethnomusicology – born between 1950 and 1960.Deemed as legitimate for several decades, these learned differentiations are presently interrogated by practitioners of these domains. In this context, this dissertation historicises the emergence of the oppositional couple primitive/civilised, underlying these divisions within the sciences of music and musical repertories, and therefore its ambition is to contribute to these contemporary debates. ; Cette thèse analyse la division moderne des domaines des sciences de la musique et la hiérarchisation des répertoires musicaux qui lui est corrélative. La recherche s'appuie sur une enquête socio-historique menée à partir du cas français et sur plusieurs sources courant du début du XVIIème au milieu du XXème siècle. Elle mobilise des ressources manuscrites et imprimées (documents administratifs, archives savantes et muséales, actes de congrès et autres imprimés issus des Expositions universelles, archives du secteur de l'édition, pièces documentant la collecte et la conservation d'instruments de musique, de chansons et d'enregistrements sonores) qui sont traitées à l'aide de plusieurs méthodes (analyse lexicale, sociologie des textes, bases de données, ethnographie historique).L'enquête met en lumière une configuration de patrimonialisation de la musique pilotée par l'État-nation français, qui participe d'un processus de longue durée de différenciation du social par la musique. Des opérations de collecte et de conservation des objets de musique sont impulsées par le Second Empire et confortées par la Troisième République. Elles concourent à assigner certains répertoires, portés par des populations vivantes, à une anhistoricité – un en-deçà de l'histoire. Ceux-ci sont distingués d'un répertoire « moderne » dont l'histoire comparée de la musique puis la musicologie s'attachent à décrire les progrès. Ce partage est analysé comme un système de domination symbolique institué par plusieurs administrations (Instruction publique, Commerce et Industrie, Beaux-Arts, Colonies), produit et reproduit par différent·e·s agent·e·s mandaté·e·s par l'État (Professeur·e·s, académicien·ne·s, conservateurs et conservatrices, dirigeant·e·s territoriaux). Les répertoires primitivisés au cours de la seconde moitié du XIXème siècle sont regroupés sous l'appellation générique de « musiques de la tradition » et constitués dans un second temps en objets de prédilection d'un domaine disciplinaire – l'ethnomusicologie – qui émerge entre 1950 et 1960.Considérés comme légitimes durant plusieurs décennies, ces différenciations savantes sont aujourd'hui interrogées par les praticien·ne·s de ces domaines. En historicisant l'émergence du couple oppositionnel primitif/civilisé sous-jacent aux divisions des sciences de la musique et des répertoires musicaux, cette thèse voudrait contribuer à nourrir ces débats contemporains.

This document is a report titled "Report of the Student Faculty Hearing Committee of Springfield College concerning the occupation of the Administration Building, April 6, 1970." This document was written February 22, 1971 and is three pages. The report explains that all defendants are guilty in wrongfully occupying the building and lists the resulting penalties. The individuals guilty are listed under the policies they violated. The members of the Student Faculty Hearing Committee are also listed at the end of the report. There is writing on the first page of the report that says "Singled out for their political ideas?" and parts of the text are marked off and underlined. Who wrote this and marked the document is not known. ; In February of 1969, a group of black Springfield College students sent a memorandum to College President Wilbur E. Locklin, in which they state that they feel displeased with the prejudices suffered by the black community at the school. They go on to list nine demands of the school that would benefit the black community, such as the enrollment of 200 students into the incoming freshman class of '73, the addition of a black staff member to the admissions office, and the hiring of a black coach for one of the athletic teams. Later that year the faculty rejected the demands of the black students. The day after, a group of almost every black student on campus entered the Administration building and began to hurl insults at the administrative staff until all students, led by Dr. Jesse Parks (the only black faculty member on campus at the time), left the building voluntarily and marched across campus and then off campus. Later that year, President Locklin began plans to build an experimental black cultural center at the school. In March of the next year, unsatisfied with the progress of civil rights at the school, a group of 49 students and several "outsiders" enter the Massasoit Hall dormitory, forcibly ejecting the students on the third floor and taking control of it. The protesting students would remain there for two days, until the college obtained a Superior Court civil injunction and the Sheriff's Department led all the occupiers out of the building and onto a motor coach bus to bring them directly to court. No one was sentenced to jail time, but all were fined. All the students were dismissed and ordered to stay off campus "for their own safety." In addition, the college leveled their own fines and required to serve 300 hundred hours of community service before students would be considered, individually, for re-admittance to Springfield College. Most of the students chose not to return. Nearly two years after the first incident, student protestors again seized the Administration Building on April 6, 1970, this time by white students in protest of the perceived "double jeopardy" placed on the black students in that they were punished by both the Superior Court and the College. The students were arrested by police and charged with trespassing and were later expelled from school. The students sued the college in Probate Court because the college judicial system offered no due process to students. The court agreed and prevented the college from proceeding against any of the occupiers until a new judicial system was in place and approved by the court. During the Collegium that took place over the summer of 1970, college officials determined that the students that were removed from campus should be invited back by the President, and, if they chose to return, participate in a series of workshops with a group of College representatives to improve black-white relationships on campus. The list of black demands continued to be worked upon by administration, and some of the demands of black students were met gradually over the next several years. ; The report also has some small stains and tears on the bottom of the paper.

Book reviewed in this article:PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: We, The Accused. By Ernest Raymond.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Who Once Eats Out of the Tin Bowl. Hans Fallada. Translated by Eric. Sutton. (Putnam. 1934. Pp. 568. 7s. 6d.)PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: A Pin to see the Peepshow. Tennyson Jesse.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: I Was a Prisoner. By William Holt. Foreword by H. R. L. Sheppard.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Caliban Shrieks. By Jack Hilton.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: I Speak for the Silent. By Vladimir V. Tchernavin.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: I was Hitler's Prisoner. By Stefan Lorant.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Rubber Truncheon. By Wolfgang Langhoff.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: All Quiet in Germany. By Karl Billinger.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: There Is No Truce. A Life of Thomas Mott Osborne. By Rudolph W. Chamberlain.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Sing Sing Doctor. By Amos O. Squire, M.D. With an Introduction by Lewis E. Lawes.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Governor Arthur's Convict System. Van Diemens Land, 1824–36. By William Douglass Forsyth.PRISONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY: PLUS çA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MEME CHOSE: Proceedings of the Sixty‐Fourth Annual Congress of the American Prison Association.YOUNG OFFENDERS THE WORLD OVER AND A SEARCHLIGHT ON SOME OFFICIAL REPORTS: Two League of Nations Reports. Child Welfare Committee: Enquiry into the Question of Children in Moral and Social Danger. Report of Mile. Chaptal.YOUNG OFFENDERS THE WORLD OVER AND A SEARCHLIGHT ON SOME OFFICIAL REPORTS: Institutions for Erring and Delinquent Minors.YOUNG OFFENDERS THE WORLD OVER AND A SEARCHLIGHT ON SOME OFFICIAL REPORTS: Les Enfants traduits en Justice. Etude d'aprés trois cents dossiers du tribunal pour enfants de l'arrondissement de Bruxelles. A. Racine.SCIENCE AND CRIME. Criminology. By Albert Morris.SCIENCE AND CRIME. Principles of Criminology. Edwin H. Sutherland.SCIENCE AND CRIME. The Close of Another Chapter in Criminology. By William Healy, M.D., Augusta F. Bronner, Ph.D., Directors, Judge Baker Guidance Centre, and Myra E. Shimberg, Ph.D., Research Department, Judge Baker Guidance Centre, New York. 1935. National Committee for Mental Hygiene.SCIENCE AND CRIME. Psychanalyse et Criminologie. By Dr. Genil‐Perrin.SCIENCE AND CRIME. Twentieth Century Crime. Eighteenth Century Methods of Control. By James Edward Hagerty.SCIENCE AND CRIME. Abstract from La Semana Médica, Buenos AiresSCIENCE AND CRIME. Handbook of Casework and Classification Methods for Offenders. (Edited by Edgar A. Doll, Ph.D. Pp. 30.)DEBTORS IN GAOL: The Scandal of Imprisonment for Debt. J. D. Unwin. Simpkin, MarshallGERMAN PENOLOGISTS ABROAD—U.S.A. AND ITALY: Kriminalistischer Bericht Ueber Eine Reise Nach Amerika. By Dr. Franz Exner, Professor in Munich.GERMAN PENOLOGISTS ABROAD—U.S.A. AND ITALY: Theorie und Praxis des fascistischen Strafvollzuges.By Dr. jur. Gunnar Dybwad.MISCELLANEOUS: The Life and Work of Sir John Fielding. By R. Leslie‐Melville.MISCELLANEOUS: Life and Death at the Old Bailey. By R. Thurston Hopkins.MISCELLANEOUS: Social Planning for Crime Control. By Arthur L. Beeley.MISCELLANEOUS: Crime Within The Square Mile. By Ex‐Chief Detective Inspector Ernest Nicholls.MISCELLANEOUS: L'Œuvre d'Adolphe Prins. Issued by the Faculty of Law, University of Brussels. By Louis Wodon and Jean Servais, Honorary Professors of the University. Foreword by Paul Hymans, President of the Administrative Council of the University.PILGRIMAGE: THE REBEL'S TALE AND A LOOKER‐ON. Proletarian Pilgrimage: The Autobiography of John Paton.PILGRIMAGE: THE REBEL'S TALE AND A LOOKER‐ON. Narrow Waters: The first volume of the life and thoughts of a Common Man. Authorship unacknowledged.

The bank insolvency framework in Poland should be modernized to ensure financial stability, maintain the continuity of critical functions in the banking system, and protect depositors and creditors, while assigning losses according to a pre-established creditor hierarchy. Several country experiences in Europe and elsewhere have demonstrated the effectiveness of new bank resolution measures by the European commission. A key aspect of the resolution process is for the authorities to swiftly assess and revalue the balance sheet of the intervened bank. Other particularities of modern resolution procedures relate to maintaining the integrity of secured financial contracts to prevent disruptions in financial market transactions including in payments and settlements systems. The treatment of systemically important institutions should rely on extraordinary resolution tools which are necessary if a bank is too large to be purchased or for its liabilities to be readily assumed. The purpose of this paper is thus to describe and recommend new features that can be added to strengthen the Polish legislation for handling commercial bank insolvencies. The paper focuses on the legal issues related to insolvency of banks (including commercial banks and cooperative banks). The banking sector's share in the total assets of the credit sector amounts to 89 percent while cooperative banks control 6 percent. The only wholly-owned state bank is the development bank Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego (BGK) which is subject to supervision by the Polish Financial Supervisory Authority (KNF).

In a scientific article, the author conducted a scientific study of the concept and content of legal liability of spouses for non-performance of alimony obligations in family law. Based on the study, the author concluded that the Family Code of Ukraine does not contain a rule on the liability of the obligated spouse for failure to maintain an incapacitated spouse or a spouse in need of maintenance in connection with the upbringing of young children. From the content of Art. 196 of the Family Code of Ukraine, it is not clear whether it applies only to cases of non-performance of child support obligations, as follows from the finding of this rule in the relevant section of the Family Code of Ukraine. It is necessary to agree with the opinion expressed in the legal doctrine on the application of the provisions of Art. 196 of the Family Code of Ukraine for all alimony relations, in this regard, we propose to make appropriate changes to this article. In this case, in case of arrears due to the fault of the spouse, who is obliged to pay alimony by court decision or under the maintenance agreement, the spouse-recipient of alimony has the right to collect a penalty (penalty), and in case of late payment, due to illness or injury of the other spouse due to the payer's fault, such payer is obliged to pay the amount of arrears at the request of the recipient of expenses, taking into account the established inflation index for the entire period of delay, as well as three percent per annum of the overdue amount. Although Art. 78 of the Family Code of Ukraine defines only three conditions of the spousal maintenance agreement: conditions, amount and terms of alimony, however, as stated in legal doctrine, such a condition as liability for non-performance of the maintenance agreement may also be determined by the parties. Unfortunately, the Family Code of Ukraine does not provide for a contractual procedure for determining alimony obligations to actual and former spouses, in this regard, in the scientific literature it is proposed to supplement the relevant provisions of Art. Art. 78 and 91 of the Family Code of Ukraine. In addition, the legislation of Ukraine in some cases provides for administrative liability for non-payment of alimony for the maintenance of one of the spouses, as well as liability in the form of one of the temporary restrictions set by the Law of Ukraine "On Enforcement Proceedings". ; В науковій статті автор провів наукове дослідження поняття та змісту юридичної відповідальності по-дружжя за невиконання аліментних зобов'язань у сімейному праві. На підставі проведеного дослідження автор дійшов висновку, що в Сімейному кодексі України відсутня норма про відповідальність зобов'язаного подружжя за невиконання обов'язку щодо утримання непрацездатного подружжя або подружжя, яке по-требує утримання у зв'язку із вихованням малолітніх дітей. Із змісту ст. 196 Сімейного кодексу України не зрозуміло, чи вона поширюється лише на випадки невиконання аліментних зобов'язань щодо дитини, як це випливає виходячи із знаходження цієї норми у відповідному розділі Сімейного кодексу України. Слід пого-дитися із висловленою у правовій доктрині думкою про застосування положень ст. 196 Сімейного кодексу України на усі аліментні відносини, у зв'язку із цим пропонуємо внесення відповідних змін до цієї статті. В такому разі, у разі виникнення заборгованості з вини подружжя, який зобов'язаний сплачувати аліменти за рішенням суду або за договором про утримання подружжя, подружжя-одержувач аліментів має право на стягнення неустойки (пені), а у разі прострочення оплати витрат, пов›язаних із хворобою або каліцтвом другого з подружжя з вини платника такий платник зобов'язаний на вимогу одержувача витрат сплатити суму заборгованості за витратами з урахуванням встановленого індексу інфляції за весь час прострочення, а також три проценти річних із простроченої суми. Хоча ст. 78 Сімейного кодексу України визначає лише три умови договору подружжя про надання утримання: умови, розмір та строки виплати аліментів, однак, як зазначається в правовій доктрині, така умова як відповідальність за невиконання договору про надання утримання, також може визначатися сторонами. На жаль, Сімейний кодекс України не передбачає договір-ного порядку визначення аліментних зобов'язань фактичним та колишнім подружжям, у зв'язку із чим, в науковій літературі пропонується доповнити відповідні положення ст. ст. 78 та 91 Сімейного кодексу Укра-їни. Крім того, законодавство України в окремих випадках передбачає адміністративну відповідальність за несплату аліментів на утримання одного з подружжя, а також відповідальність у вигляді одного з тимчасо-вих обмежень, визначених Законом України «Про виконавче провадження».