Suchergebnisse

The article is devoted to the consideration of questions about the legal nature of the institution of judicial conciliation, its principles, the legal status of a judicial conciliator, the procedural rights and obligations of participants in judicial conciliation in civil and arbitration proceedings. The author proceeds from the fact that the judicial conciliation procedure is implemented within the framework of civil, arbitration and administrative legal proceedings, regulated by the norms of procedural legislation, due to which it is a kind of public law activity. Accordingly, a conclusion is made about the public powers of the judicial conciliator and the "vertical" nature of the relationship connecting him with the parties to the legal conflict during the judicial conciliation procedure. At the same time, attention is drawn to the specific nature of the direction of judicial reconciliation (not the resolution of the conflict, but its settlement), as well as the specific principles of this procedure (confidentiality). The procedural rights and obligations of the parties to judicial reconciliation, which are derived from the general rights and obligations of the parties in arbitration proceedings, are analyzed. The question of the relationship between the principles of judicial conciliation procedure and the general principles of civil and arbitration proceedings is also considered. Unlike out-of-court conciliation, judicial conciliation procedures are part of the general civil procedural form, therefore their organization and conduct must be carried out in accordance with the principles of civil and arbitration process.

International Law — Binding Force of — Interpretation of Treaties to Conform with Rules of.Treaties — Interpretation of — Principles and Rules of Interpretation — Existence of — Avoidance of Absurdity — Intention of the Parties — Comparison of Texts in Different Languages — Conformity with Rules of International Law — Literal Interpretation — Restrictive Interpretation.Treaties — Interpretation of — Miscellaneous — Peace Treaty — Jurisdiction of Conciliation Commission Set Up under.Treaties — Special Kinds of — Peace Treaties — Nature of.Arbitration — In General — Conception of Arbitration — Distinction between Arbitral Tribunals and Conciliation Commissions.Conciliation — Conciliation Commissions — Jurisdiction of — Competence to Determine Jurisdiction — Distinction between Power to Determine Procedure and Power to Determine Jurisdiction — Jurisdiction to Decide on Abstract Questions of Law — Conciliation Commissions Set Up under Peace Treaty — Distinguished from Arbitral Tribunals — Treaties — Interpretation of — Principles and Rules of Interpretation — Existence of — Avoidance of Absurdity — Intention of the Parties — Comparison of Texts in Different Languages — Conformity with Rules of International Law — Literal Interpretation — Restrictive Interpretation — Treaties Regarded as Limitations of Sovereigty of State.

The meanings of legal textual objects, such as laws, legal principles, concepts, and judgments, change over time. New meanings are proposed by legislators, courts, lawyers, and other legal actors, and are then argued over in courts. In this article, based on my 2011 Master's thesis, I discuss some of the different meanings proposed for conciliation1 in the context of international commercial dispute resolution. On the basis of contemporary legislative material, caselaw and jurisprudence, I identify three distinct legal meanings. The first meaning is that of a blanket denial of any legal effect of conciliation agreements. Under this meaning, courts simply leave conciliation agreements unenforced. The second meaning is that of applying a restrictive interpretation on conciliation agreements. Under this meaning, conciliation agreements must be drafted in a particular form and any deficiency in them may cause the agreement to be denied legal meaning. The third meaning is that of applying a liberal interpretation to conciliation agreements. Under this meaning, any clearly expressed intention to conciliate is given independent legal effect, if necessary through a constructive interpretation that overcomes deficiencies in form. Lacking any binding international legislation on conciliation, I reflect on these three different meanings of conciliation in light of the brocard pacta sunt servanda; agreements must be kept. A key problem is that no single content can be identified for pacta sunt servanda itself; courts use this brocard to represent not only different interpretive paradigms, but also the more general principles of equity. Agreements are enforced to the extent that their content is understandable and acceptable to the relevant legal system. Discourse over this acceptability takes place through the principle of pacta sunt servanda and all the concepts and ideas used to clarify that principle. Thus, identifying the true motives of courts that apply different kinds of meaning to conciliation agreements is difficult. Therefore, I argue that the only meaning that can reasonably be attributed to conciliation in the international commercial context is that of a liberal interpretation seeking to assign legal effect to all agreements to conciliate. Doing so would alleviate paradigmatic confusion when courts interpret conciliation agreements and better protect the true intentions of the parties. Another compelling reason for adopting a liberal interpretation of conciliation agreements is the inherent value of conciliation for international dispute resolution in general. It has been recognised by business actors, international dispute resolution institutes, international and national legislation, and courts of law. In practice, while leading authorities view preparing for a restrictive interpretation of conciliation agreements as a "safe choice", business actors should also acknowledge that courts have increasing possibilities for applying a liberal interpretation to conciliation agreements. Thus, business actors should avert negative consequences, for example in relation to the validity of arbitral awards, by acting to uphold any contractual intention to conciliate prior to commencing litigation. Section 2 provides an overview of the legal and practical contexts of international commercial conciliation. In Section 3, I review a number of legal instruments and caselaw on conciliation and, based on these, identify three different meanings given to conciliation in different legal contexts. Finally, in Section 4, I evaluate the three different meanings of conciliation in light of their legal and practical implications. Section 4.4 provides an overview of the key findings on a general level and particularly in relation to Finnish law.

Increasingly in the last few years, and more particularly in recent months, the effectiveness of compulsory government-sponsored conciliation in labour disputes has been called into question. Unions and employers alike have begun to ask not only whether the delays required by Canadian law make a worth-while positive contribution to the settlement of disputes, but whether in some cases they do not actually impede the reaching of a settlement.In the midst of this debate it is of interest to recall that the principle of compulsory delay and conciliation has had a prominent and generally respected place in Canadian labour law for fifty years. The original Industrial Disputes Investigation Act of 1907 introduced the then revolutionary idea that an enforced waiting-period, accompanied by investigation, would so modify the perspective of the parties in a labour dispute that many stoppages of work would be avoided; and this principle has stood virtually unaltered in Canadian law ever since. The significant changes which have taken place since 1907 have been in the application of the principle rather than in the principle itself. As Professor Woods pointed out to this Association last spring, the use of compulsory conciliation and delay, originally meant to encompass all types of dispute, has come to be limited to one of the four main types, namely, negotiation disputes. At the same time, the range of industry in which the principle is being applied has been greatly extended. In the original I.D.I. Act, it was applied compulsorily only to industries held to possess the character of a public utility; it was applied to other industries only when desired by both parties.

The present study is intended to be a modest contribution to Schlesinger's research project concerning the "general principles of law recognized by civilized nations." At the same time it tends to comply with the voeu recommended by Jenks to the Institut de Droit International concerning the desirability of better information on the decisions of international arbitral tribunals. It is the aim of the present study to trace all explicit or implied references to these "general principles of law recognized by civilized nations" which may be found in the hitherto published decisions of the Conciliation Commissions established under Article 83 of the Peace Treaty with Italy of February 10, 1947. These Commissions consist of one member appointed by each of the states concerned. If these two members fail to agree, they draft a "statement of disagreement," whereupon a third member,5 citizen of a third state, is added to the Commission, which shall then decide the case concerned by a majority vote.

I. Introduction -- 2. Amendment to the Civil Code, and Domestic Relations Law and the Family Court -- 3. Organization of the Domestic Relations Adjudgment Division in the Family Court -- 4. History of the Family Court -- II. Practical Business -- Section 1. General Remarks -- Section 2. Interpretation of Official Duties -- Section 3. General Procedures -- Section 4. Special Procedures -- Section 5. Standards of Domestic Matters Conciliation -- Section 6. Conciliation Terms -- Section 7. Methods of Conciliation -- III. Legislation -- Section 1. Jurisdiction -- Section 2. Procedures -- Section 3. Validity -- Section 4. Special Adjudgment in Conciliation -- Section 5. Notification to Census Registrar -- Section 6. Transfer of Conciliation and Adjudgment -- Section 7. Conciliation Priority Principle -- Section 8. Penal Provisions.

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and Relate, UK, co‐convened a 24‐hour consultation at St George's House, Windsor, UK, on modern family justice issues across Europe. This article identifies a preliminary set of guiding principles for family justice programs developed by consultation participants.

The article is a legislative comment on the Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Bill introduced in 2019 keeping in mind Arbitration in the International context and comparing it with the Amendment Act and the Legislature in Indian context. The new 2019 amendment, envisages major changes which will be discussed in this Article vis-à-vis International Arbitration. The article critically analyzes some of its provisions to understand if it is indeed a step in the right direction for India to become a hub for international arbitration. The analysis and comments in this article are solely and exclusively from the standpoint of international arbitration. Thus, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in India needs to be looked at in reference to both international and principles of Indian law. The uncertainty would arise mainly in context of the rules which the parties frame in the course of arbitration, which have not been codified. Thus, this practice must be examined in light of the UNCITRAL rules and Indian Administrative law, (since the Arbitration Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body) and it should then be seen whether the manner of framing rules under the Arbitration Act is as envisaged under the UNCITRAL model law

The assassination of Israeli premier Yitzhak Rabin provided the most vivid demonstration to date of religious-nationalist opposition inside Israel to the principle of exchanging land for peace. This article sets out to explore this world view and its intellectual origins, exploring in the process how the use of sacred Judaic texts have become both the monopoly of religious-nationalism and the template for politically inspired violence against those in Israel suspected of condoning territorial compromise. This article concludes that if the ideotheology of religious-nationalists is to be assuaged, a religious discourse supporting territorial retrenchment has to become part of the political fabric of the centre-left in Israel. ; Instituto de Relaciones Internacionales (IRI)

People's conciliation is a grass‐roots effort for conflict management in China. It settles civil disputes without characterizing them as conflicts between blameworthy adversaries. It does not take legal effect. But with support from the people's court and government, it is generally honored as an institution to maintain and promote mutual confidence and reciprocal relations among rural villagers, urban residents, and work unit employees. This paper attempts to provide a comprehensive description and analysis of people's conciliation. The origin, development, and organization are approached in relation to conciliation in Chinese history as well as other forms of intervention such as self‐conducted, lawyer‐assisted, administrative, and judicial conciliation. Case variety, principle, prohibition, strategy, procedure, and conciliator training are examined Illustrative cases are provided. Ideological and institutional aspects are analyzed in light of Maoism, political economy, culture and community, and public attitude in China.

The Child Protection Mediation Guidelines Workgroup came together under the auspices of the Child Welfare Collaborative Decision Making Network to examine program development and the practice of Child Protection Mediation (CPM). The Workgroup convened and began its work in 2010. The resultant "Guidelines for Child Protection Mediation" was approved by the AFCC Board of Directors in 2012.Key Points for the Family Court Community
Child Protection Mediation provides an opportunity for families and professionals involved in child abuse and neglect matters to resolve disputes in a safe, inclusive and thoughtful manner.
The Guidelines for Child Protection Mediation establish core principles and strategies for establishing and maintaining high quality child protection mediation programs and practices.
The Guidelines for Child Protection Mediation can serve as a road map for programs and practitioners to follow in their day‐to‐day work with families and their children who are involved with the child welfare system.

BOOK COVER; HALF-TITLE; SERIES-TITLE; TITLE; COPYRIGHT; CONTENTS; TABLES; PREFACE; ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS; NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION; INTRODUCTION; 1. IBN HANBAL AND IBN TAYMIYYAH; 2. A COMPARISON OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ISLAMIC LAW ACCORDING TO IBN HANBAL AND IBN TAYMIYYAH; 3. RE-LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS: Ibn Taymiyyah and Hanbali usul; 4. RECONSTRUCTION: Ibn Taymiyyah and Hanbali jurisprudence; 5. THE LEGACY: The influence of Ibn Taymiyyah on Hanbali jurists; 6. A CASE OF CONFLICT?: The intended triple divorce revisited; CONCLUSIONS; NOTES; BIBLIOGRAPHY; INDEX