Suchergebnisse

Članak prikazuje recentne studije o novcu kao pravnom fenomenu, putem čijeg kreiranja različiti "stakeholderi" uređuju raspodjelu resursa i odnose između pojedinih dijelova društva. U ovoj koncepciji novac formira tržište, a ne obratno. Na primjeru "slobodnog kovanja" karakterističnog za Englesku od 12. do 14. stoljeća analizira se dilema nominalizam – metalizam, te tri ograničenja robnog novca u kojima se očituje Greshamov zakon, odnosno kontroverza likvidnosti. U članku se ne analizira na koje proturječnosti nailazi nominalistička politika novca. Pokazuje se da se ni u suvremenoj koncepciji robnog novca, eksplicitnoj u Hayekovoj studiji The Denationalization of Money, zbog proturječja likvidnosti ne može – u kreiranju i održanju novčanog sustava – izbjeći uloga društvenih, izvantržišnih faktora, uz ostalo i prava. Kako mnogi autori zaključuju da je i zajednička europska valuta koncipirana po uzoru na zlatni standard (robni novac), slijedi da i uspjeh njezina dizajna i funkcioniranja ne može biti prepušten samo tržišnom mehanizmu, nego ovisi o društvenoj, političkoj i pravnoj potpori. ; The paper describes money as a legal phenomenon, which means that stakeholders use money to allocate resources and manage social relations. In this understanding money creates markets and not vice versa. The system of money creation called free minting, which was common in England from the 12th to the 14th century, is described. Three constraints of commodity money are explained and the nominalism – metalism dilemma is analysed. The focus of the analysis is on Gresham's law and the problem of liquidity of commodity money. The similarity between medieval commodity money and a modern concept of commodity money in the book The Denationalization of Money by Friedrich von Hayek is shown. The conclusion is that the market mechanism cannot solve the problem of liquidity without social agents not included in the market exchange. Since the common European currency is to some degree similar to the gold standard, the same conclusion works for the euro.

"The European Union is today a major player in many policy areas, going from classic economic fields as competition policy, agriculture and fisheries policy to new emergent fields as environmental policy, arterial intelligence policy, security and foreign policy and criminal justice policy. These policies comes with an increasing level of EU regulation, having also a substantive impact on the harmonization of national policies and regulations. This expansion of EU competence naturally also places new demands on their enforcement, especially when it comes to investigations with the aim of imposing punitive administrative and/or criminal sanctions. In this expanded version of his valedictory lecture Prof. Vervaele is assessing 1) to what extent the EU and its Member States have a policy on punitive enforcement in the internal market and in the Area of Freedom Security and Justice and 2) how this policy translates into the harmonization of substantive administrative and criminal law and procedural law at the national level and into the elaboration of administrative and judicial cooperation instruments and the setting up of European enforcement agencies. The assessment includes to what extent this policy takes account of the human rights obligations. Vervaele concludes with a plea for a European model for punitive law enforcement with an increased alignment between the administrative enforcement tools in the internal market and the criminal enforcement tools in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. In this model the national enforcement authorities are build in under a network cooperation scheme."--

Which rights and obligations arise from the EU principle prohibiting unjust enrichment? This is the first publication to thoroughly examine the consequences this principle has - or may have - for private law relationships. An illuminating analysis, bearing both academic and practical importance. As the interplay between EU law and national private law intensifies, the question arises how the EU principle prohibiting unjust enrichment plays into various legal relationships involving one or more individuals. Unjust enrichment in European Union law takes a pioneering step in addressing this pressing issue. The author puts forward a compelling analysis, taking into account the functions of unjust enrichment in a number of national law systems and the functions of general principles of EU law, as well as case law of the Court of Justice of the EU. For analytic purposes, links are identified between EU causes of action based on undue payment, unjust enrichment and unlawful act, respectively. This is followed by a discussion whether or not such actions should be founded on violation of an EU provision having direct (horizontal) effect. Insight into the possible consequences of the EU principle prohibiting unjust enrichment has both academic and practical importance. The reader gains a deeper understanding of how the Court of Justice may further develop EU law on the basis of private-law principles. The study illuminates which rights individuals may derive from such legal principles and - if they can do so - under which circumstances

Međunarodni kazneni sud novo je međunarodno tijelo kojem je glavni cilj istraga i suđenje slučajeva genocida, ratnih zločina, te zločina protiv čovječnosti u zemljama članicama. Iako su Sjedinjene Američke Države u 2000. potpisale Rimski statut, međunarodnu povelju iz 1998. koja predstavlja osnovicu Međunarodnog kaznenog suda, Busheva vlada napravila je velik zaokret godinu dana kasnije, potpuno se ograđujući od svake ideje o suđenju Amerikancima izvan zemlje. Tekst analizira glavne argumente američke vanjske politike povezane s Međunarodnim kaznenim sudom, od navodne pristranosti Suda, te odnosa između Suda i Ujedinjenih naroda, pa sve do pitanja američkog suvereniteta. Također, ponuđena je i međunarodnopravna politička kritika nedavnih poteza američke vlade, koji štete i američkim nacionalnim interesima, i međunarodnoj sigurnosti. ; The International Criminal Court is a new international body constituted with the aim of prosecuting and trying cases of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Although in 2000 the United States signed the 1998 Rome Statute, which is the foundation of the International Criminal Court, the Bush Administration took a radically different position the following year, protecting itself from any idea of trying American citizens abroad. This text analyses the main U.S. foreign policy arguments pertaining to the ICC, from the alleged impartiality of the Court and the relationship between the Court and the United Nations, to the question of American sovereignty. In addition, the text offers an international legal and political critique of the recent U.S. policy actions, which harmed both American national interests, as well as international security.

Pokrovčeva knjiga Slobodno stvaranje prava: Herman U. Kantorowicz i slobodnopravni pokret (2018) nameće pitanje izraženo naslovom ovog rada na koje rad odgovara u tri koraka: prvo, pretpostavkom da je pitanje odgovorivo samo idealnim tipovima pravnih disciplina / funkcija; drugo, upućivanjem na kontekst Kantorowiczevih gledišta, osobito na objavu presuda; treće, ocjenom da je Kantorowicz podijelio pravnu znanost u prepletene funkcije a ne u odvojene discipline. U tu svrhu rad nudi idealne tipove disciplina i funkcija pravne dogmatike, pravne historije, pravne teorije i, kao najsloženiji i najkorisniji skup funkcija, pravnopolitičku analizu. Pretpostavka je, koja se ne dokazuje, da ne postoji ni oštra granica između pravne znanosti i susjednih znanosti: sociologije, ekonomije, psihologije, filozofije. ; Is Herman U. Kantorowicz's classification of legal disciplines - which includes general legal science, legal dogmatics, legal history, sociology of law, philosophy of law, and legal policy - a division of scholarly knowledge of law into distinct disciplines/sciences or into intertwined functions of a single scholarly discipline/science? The question is prompted by the book written by Zoran Pokrovac entitled Slobodno stvaranje prava: Hermann U. Kantorowicz i slobodnopravni pokret (Free Law: Hermann U. Kantorowicz and the Free Law Movement ) and published by "Breza" and the Faculty of Law of the University of Split in 2018. Answering this question may assist Croatian legal scholars in finding standards of scholarly excellence, especially of research de lege ferenda. This paper offers an answer in three steps. The first is the recognition that scholarly practices differ considerably, which means that the question may be answered only by construing and correlating ideal types of legal disciplines / functions that are compatible with Kantorowicz's general ideas, prominent interpretations of legal scholarship, and Croatian mainstream legal scholarship since. The second step provides a context of Kantorowicz's ...

Voor de zittende Sudanese president Al-Bashir geldt een internationaal arrestatiebevel. België en Senegal bakkeleien in Den Haag over de berechting van de voormalig Tsjaadse dictator Habré. In haar oratie stelt Barbara Oomen dat het de wereldgemeenschap steeds meer menens is met de mensenrechten. Paradoxaal genoeg vraagt dit proces van universalisering van de mensenrechten lokale verankering. De nadruk op 'traditionele' rechtspleging na ernstige mensenrechtenschendingen vormt hiervan een voorbeeld. Oomen stelt dat zowel de wereldgemeenschap in wording als lokale gemeenschappen het monopolie op

Predmet ovog rada jest pravo na branitelja, i to pravo na branitelja na teret države (formalna obrana siromašnih okrivljenika) kao njegov element te kako proizlazi iz Direktive (EU) 2016/1919 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 26. listopada 2016. o pravnoj pomoći za osumnjičenike i okrivljenike u kaznenom postupku i za tražene osobe u postupku na temelju europskog uhidbenog naloga i Direktive 2013/48/EU Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 22. listopada 2013. o pravu na pristup odvjetniku u kaznenom postupku i u postupku na temelju europskog uhidbenog naloga te o pravu na obavješćivanje treće strane u slučaju oduzimanja slobode i na komunikaciju s trećim osobama i konzularnim tijelima tijekom trajanja oduzimanja slobode. Kroz analizu mjerodavne prakse Europskog suda za ljudska prava cilj je pokazati u kojoj mjeri praksa pristupa branitelju i hrvatsko odvjetništvo odgovaraju zahtjevima direktiva. Spomenuta praktična implementacija direktiva o pravu na pristup branitelju i pravnoj pomoći u hrvatskom odvjetništvu predstavlja posebni dio rada. U tom se dijelu rada analiziraju obveze koje iz direktiva proizlaze za odvjetništvo, a poseban se naglasak stavlja na cjeloživotno obrazovanje odvjetnika, njihovu organizaciju putem braniteljskih lista unutar odvjetničkih zborova, kao i na učinkovit sustav disciplinske odgovornosti odvjetnika. ; The subject of this paper is the right to a lawyer, specifically, a lawyer financed by the state (formal defence of persons lacking sufficient means), as regulated by Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings, and by Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty. By analysing the relevant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, we aim to demonstrate the degree of compliance of the Croatian lawyers` approach with the Directives. The practical implementation of the mentioned Directives is a specific part of this work. In this respect, we analyse the obligations for lawyers stemming from the directives, with an emphasis on the education of lawyers, their organisation via specific lists, as well as an effective system of disciplinary responsibility.

The author's comprehensive research project, of which this article is but an introductory outline, inquires into the kind of history written out by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). In order to investigate the interrelation between criminal law & history, the author faced the following question: what would the history of the disintegration of Yugoslavia & of conflicts in its territory look like if all we had were the judgments of the Hague Tribunal? The author bases his reply on an analysis of first-instance judgments of the Trial Chamber, from which he singles out "historical facts," & rejects the reflections of the Chamber on legal & procedural issues. As a model case he uses the first ICTY judgment pronounced against Dusko Tadic (the trial started on May 7, 1996, & the judgment was pronounced a year later). Although he estimates that the first judgment was not written in an optimal way, the author deems that most preliminarily established historical facts were relevant to historiography, & that, in particular, the judgment offers a universally acceptable notion of the history of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia & of socialist Yugoslavia. He is of the opinion that the extensive documentation of ICTY (the "Hague Tribunal") will have a major influence on the work of future generations of historians. Such a unique & replete archive of historical material is increasingly available to the public & to scientists through ICTY's online database. The most recent scientific works dealing with the former Yugoslavia also make use of the Tribunal's judgments & documentation. Scientists will have to pay due attention to the narratives included therein. Adapted from the source document.