Suchergebnisse

Why do unelected bureaucrats get to exercise power? What are the limits on those powers? What recourse do citizens have if bureaucrats abuse those powers? Anyone working with government needs to know the answers to these questions. Administrative Law: The Sources and Limits of Government Agency Power concisely examines the everyday challenges of administrative responsibilities and provides students with a way to understand and manage the complicated mission that is governance. Written by leading scholar Daniel Feldman, the book avoids technical legal language, but at the same time provides solid coverage of legal principles and exemplar studies, which allows students to gain a clear understanding of a complicated and critical aspect of governance.

This article surveys judicial and legislative developments in Virginia property law since the last Survey article on this topic was published, with primary emphasis on developments from June 1, 1998 to June 1, 2000. Although there were interesting developments in several areas of property law, the most important developments arose in the Supreme Court of Virginia's decisions involving covenants, servitudes, and easements. A significant portion of this article will explain and analyze those decisions.

This law grants the government the right to manage, regulate, control and manage the strategic mining sector, in accordance with the principles of sustainability, precaution, prevention and efficiency.

The enterprise of comparative law is familiar, yet its conceptual whereabouts remain somewhat obscure. Comparing Law: Comparative Law as Reconstruction of Collective Commitments reconstructs comparative law scholarship into a systematic account of comparative law as an autonomous academic discipline. The point of that discipline is neither to harmonize world law, nor to emphasize its cultural diversity, but rather to understand each legal system on its own terms. As the proposed reconstruction exercise involves bridging comparative law and contemporary legal theory, it shows how comparative law and legal theory both stand to benefit from being exposed to each other. At a time when many courses are adding a transnational perspective, Valcke offers a more theoretical, broadened, and refreshed view of comparative law.

This contribution deals with the question of whether a judgment from a mainstream court dealing with customary law can be regarded as authority and thus as a recording of a customary rule or rules. When a mainstream court develops customary law to promote constitutional values or strikes customary law down for want of constitutionality, it creates new rules which are written down but which can easily be changed when society brings it to court and convinces the court that the rule needs to be changed. It is my contention that case law is a binding source of law, including customary law, which must be followed until such time that it is either absorbed into legislation or amended by a subsequent decision in terms of the principle of stare decisis. It gives us some measure of assurance as to the law to be followed. The high number of customary law disputes taken to a court of law is confirmation that traditional communities are embracing the power of the courts to settle their disputes. The judgments of these courts inevitably become the origins of customary rules that they develop and can thus be regarded as piecemeal recording of (living) customary law.