Michael Lobban shows how dissatisfaction with the law-equity split in English civil justice predated the Judicature Act reforms by two generations at least (one could argue two-and-a half centuries or more—periodization fails quickly). Lobban links the first modern debates over fusion to high legal politics on the one hand and to the more intricate internal problems of evidence, procedure, and jurisdiction on the other. Lawyers of the earlier Victorian age found the Chancery system bequeathed to them by Lord Eldon to be intolerable on two counts: it represented Old Corruption or monopolistic private control of public offices and it exacted heavy costs in procedural inconvenience, cost, and delay. Lobban does not see ideology such as Benthamite philosophy driving the rationalization of Chancery doctrine and institutions though he does not dismiss this factor entirely.
The current study examines the evolution of bankruptcy reforms in India through time, as well as the effectiveness of these changes since they were first implemented in the country. There is an attempt to address the current state of cross-border bankruptcy legislation and process in India, as well as how it affects foreign creditors who invest in Indian firms. To make it more applicable to current circumstances, all of this is extended with the use of a hypothetical scenario, which also serves to demonstrate the cumulative impact of past and currently in effect legislation.
The current study examines the evolution of bankruptcy reforms in India through time, as well as the effectiveness of these changes since they were first implemented in the country. There is an attempt to address the current state of cross-border bankruptcy legislation and process in India, as well as how it affects foreign creditors who invest in Indian firms. To make it more applicable to current circumstances, all of this is extended with the use of a hypothetical scenario, which also serves to demonstrate the cumulative impact of past and currently in effect legislation.
The current study examines the evolution of bankruptcy reforms in India through time, as well as the effectiveness of these changes since they were first implemented in the country. There is an attempt to address the current state of cross-border bankruptcy legislation and process in India, as well as how it affects foreign creditors who invest in Indian firms. To make it more applicable to current circumstances, all of this is extended with the use of a hypothetical scenario, which also serves to demonstrate the cumulative impact of past and currently in effect legislation.
This paper focused on law reform in Indonesia post-Soeharto period. It analyses whether the promotion of justice has been conducted. It aims to analyse whether the law reform during the reign of B.J. Habibie impeded on the promotion of justice. This paper takes the position that the promotion of justice was absent during Soeharto's presidency, and through an analysis of five law reforms introduced after his downfall - No. 2 of 1999 on Political Parties, No. 3 of 1999 on General Elections, No. 28 of 1999 on Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism, No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption and No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights. It is argued that that the laws introduced during the Post-Soeharto era did not see to the complete promotion of justice.
Contents: I. The context of law reform in Canada II. The law reform movement in Canada 1. The pre-modern concept of law reform 2. Modern law reform 3. Post-modern law reform III. Conclusion
In this article, we examine the phenomenon of cyberflashing, outlining its prevalence, harms, and victim-survivors' experiences. We then consider the extent to which English criminal law currently applies to this form of sexual abuse. We argue that although cyberflashing can be prosecuted in England and Wales, this is only in very limited circumstances; the existing law is confusing, piecemeal, has significant omissions, and consequently prosecutions are extremely unlikely. As such, the current criminal law in England and Wales is failing victim-survivors of cyberflashing. Due to its prevalence, its harmful impacts and similarities with other criminalised forms of sexual violence, comprehensive law reform, which appropriately addresses cyberflashing as a sexual offence, is now critical. Accordingly, we examine legislation in other jurisdictions where criminal laws targeting cyberflashing have been adopted, and provide recommendations for law reform: specifically, we recommend the development of a new criminal offence that purposely targets cyberflashing in all its forms.
Change and improvement cannot be effected without legislation. Legislation will be much improved if it has a law reform background or input which brings with it a high level of thoroughness. Without this, some laws may begin to manifest defects and become liable to amendment soon after coming into force.
Der Beitrag untersucht die grundlegenden rechtspolitischen Ziele, die der Reform des Gesellschaftsgesetzes und der Schaffung zweier selbstregulativer Instrumente, dem Corporate Governance Code und dem Stewardship Code, in Japan zugrunde liegen. Allgemein ausgedrückt, dient die Corporate Governance der Umsetzung mindestens eines der folgenden beiden Ziele: Compliance oder Effizienz. Die amtierende japanische Regierung hat die Effizienz, insbesondere in Form einer Profitabilitätssteigerung und Innovationsförderung, zum Ziel der Corporate Governance Reformen erklärt. Effizienz kann als gleichbedeutend mit einer Steigerung der Gewinne angesehen werden. Gewinne resultieren aus den Einnahmen abzüglich der Ausgaben. Traditionell ist Corporate Governance so ausgestaltet, dass die Ausgaben verringert werden, insbesondere die sogenannten "agency costs", wie etwa dadurch, dass die Unternehmensführung daran gehindert wird, die Ressourcen des Unternehmens zu verschwenden. Damit korrespondierend galt es als ausgemacht, dass nur der Markt die Einnahmen erhöhen und Innovationen fördern könne. Im Gegensatz dazu versuchen die japanischen Reformen jedoch, letzteres durch eine Verschärfung der Regulierung zu erreichen. Diese Situation unterscheidet sich fundamental von den in Europa durchgeführten Corporate Governance Reformen. Nach der 2007 einsetzenden Finanzkrise haben die europäischen Staaten Corporate Governance Reformen eingeleitet, die das Ziel hatten, ein Eingehen übermäßiger Risiken durch die Unternehmen zu verhindern oder zumindest zu kontrollieren. Die entsprechenden japanischen Reformen scheinen demgegenüber jedoch gerade darauf ausgerichtet zu sein, das Eingehen von Risiken zu erleichtern. Europa und Japan bewegen sich mithin in entgegengesetzte Richtungen. Der Beitrag diskutiert fünf Beispiele, um das Ziel der Corporate Governance Reform in Japan zu illustrieren: (I) ein Verwaltungsrat mit Überwachungsaufgaben ("monitoring board"), (II) eine neue Organisationsstruktur für Aktiengesellschaften, (III) die zwingende Ernennung außenstehender Verwaltungsratsmitglieder, (IV) die personenbezogene Genehmigung von Managementgehältern und (V) das Verfahren zur Ernennung von Verwaltungsratsmitgliedern. Von diesen fünf Möglichkeiten qualifiziert das japanische Gesellschaftsrecht den Einsatz eines Verwaltungsrats mit Überwachungsaufgaben als den Schlüssel für eine Qualitätsverbesserung des Managements und eine Steigerung von Einnahmen und Innovationen. Die Reformanstrengungen Japans sehen sich mit folgender Frage konfrontiert: Erhöhen gesellschaftsrechtliche Reformen die Profitabilität der Unternehmen? Dies hängt mit der weiteren Frage zusammen, ob Corporate Governance diesbezüglich überhaupt eine Rolle spielt. Das japanische Experiment bringt spezifische Herausforderungen mit sich und zeigt eine Reihe von interessanten Aspekten auf. Allerdings hat im Zuge des Skandals um Carlos Ghosn im November 2018 die Erkenntnis an Gewicht gewonnen, dass Compliance wichtiger als eine Gewinnsteigerung ist. Dies könnte zur Folge haben, dass das japanische Corporate Governance Experiment abgebrochen werden wird, bevor es überhaupt Erfolge zeitigen konnte. (Die Redaktion) ; This article surveys the fundamental goals behind the Japanese Companies Act Reform and two new soft laws, the Corporate Governance Code and the Stewardship Code. Generally speaking, corporate governance could be classified as meeting one of two aims: compliance or efficiency. Japan's incumbent cabinet has set efficiency – particularly increasing corporate income and fostering innovation – as the goal of corporate governance reforms. Efficiency can be paraphrased as increasing profit. Profit consists of income minus costs. Traditionally, corporate governance is designed to reduce costs, especially agency costs, e.g. by preventing managers from wasting corporate assets. Conversely, it was seen as common sense that only the market can increase income and prompt innovation. However, the Japanese reforms aim at achieving these latter results by tightening regulation. This situation is completely different from corporate governance reform in EU countries. After the financial crisis of 2007, EU countries undertook corporate governance reforms to control, or prevent, the taking of too much risk. By contrast, Japanese corporate governance reform looks to promote risk taking. Thus, EU and Japan face in opposite directions. This article considers five examples that help to illustrate the goal of Japan's reform of corporate governance: (I) monitoring boards, (II) a new corporate organizational structure, (III) mandatory outside directors, (IV) individual director's remuneration, and (V) the nominee director process. Of these five areas, the article argues that Japanese corporate law sees the use of monitoring boards as key to improving the quality of managers and increasing corporate income and innovation. Japan's efforts at reform face a question: Do corporate law reforms increase profitability? This is related to the question of whether corporate governance matters or not. The Japanese experiment entails unique challenges and features a variety of interesting aspects. Yet after the Carlos Ghosn scandal of November 2018, the notion that compliance is more important than increasing profit has become more powerful. Thus, this experiment might be abandoned before achieving any results.
Evolution of world trade produces immense effect to legal system of all countries. In the old days when world trade was subjected to protectionism, legal mechanism of all countries leaned upon State close control system via State permission or licensing. The State control system however came up with red tape, duplication of works and corruptions. During the path to liberalization of world trade in 1980s, deregulation and self-regulation were fashionable regime of legislation in OECD countries with a view to reduce those problems and to enhance their competitiveness in global market. Nevertheless, many crises broken during 1990s incited fear of the policy makers in several jurisdictions on self-regulation in some sectors and close State control had been brought back into action once but limited to some sensitive sectors. During the grate expansion of free trade in 2000s, OECD countries had led better regulation policy into their legislative processes in order to reduce unnecessary compliance costs produced by legislations and born by both private and public sectors. When those costs have plunged, the national competitiveness of all OECD members goes up high. Thailand in contrast still confines her legislative concept upon State control system in almost all activities in regardless of new paradigm of world trade. That is why this country is unable to escape from the middle income trap.
For reasons of effectiveness, efficiency and equity, Australian law reform should be planned carefully. Academics can and should take the lead in this process. This book collects over 50 discrete law reform recommendations, encapsulated in short, digestible essays written by leading Australian scholars. It emerges from a major conference held at The Australian National University in 2016, which featured intensive discussion among participants from government, practice and the academy. The book is intended to serve as a national focal point for Australian legal innovation. It is divided into six main parts: commercial and corporate law, criminal law and evidence, environmental law, private law, public law, and legal practice and legal education. In addition, Indigenous perspectives on law reform are embedded throughout each part. This collective work—the first of its kind—will be of value to policy makers, media, law reform agencies, academics, practitioners and the judiciary. It provides a bird's eye view of the current state and the future of law reform in Australia.
This thesis is about cultural appropriation, copyright law, and tattoos. It explores in depth the argument for law reform to prevent the cultural appropriation of Māori and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, with a particular focus on the protection of cultural imagery and arts styles. First, the thesis unpacks the nature of cultural appropriation claims as possessive claims, identity claims, and performative utterances. Second, it analyses the ambiguities and contradictions that sit behind cultural appropriation claims, as identified through law reform scholarship and an empirical study of how law interacts with and governs cultural life and artistic practice, with respect to tattoo subculture. Third, it teases out the political stakes of alleging cultural appropriation through a close consideration of historical constructions of cultural difference and intercultural dealings in tattoo in the Pacific region.Three analytical frameworks of 'performativity', 'law and society', and 'desire for the Other' help frame the inquiry.Doctrinal analysis is utilised to explore private property claims over imagery and arts styles, and contextualise discussion of legal exclusion and inclusion of Indigenous peoples and their artforms. Fieldwork exposes how meaning is made outside of the formal legal frame in the everyday lives of artists, and the dynamism and contest that marks cultural production. Historical analysis provides a deeper understanding of cultural appropriation allegations as performances that construct a very specific relationship between appropriation and the colonial past.In exploring the intersection of cultural appropriation and law from above, from below, and in historical context this thesis exposes the dynamism of cultural appropriation claims, the challenges of transplanting new legal norms within artistic subcultures, and the politics that is engaged, resisted, and produced by claims of cultural appropriation in the domain of copyright law. Ultimately, it is argued that the justification for, and utility of, legal intervention in local sites that already order creativity, appropriation, and conflict resolution in the shadow of the law is neither as straightforward nor as persuasive as is assumed in reform scholarship.
Drawing on examples from Justice Antonin Scalia's jurisprudence, this Essay uses the perspective of judicial departmentalism to examine the nature and limits of two partially successful originalist law reforms in recent years. It then shifts to an examination of how a faulty conception of judicial supremacy drove a few nonoriginalist changes in the law that Scalia properly dissented from. Despite the mistaken judicial supremacy motivating these decisions, a closer look reveals them to be backhanded tributes to judicial departmentalism because of the way that the Court had to change jurisdictional and remedial doctrines to accomplish its substantive-law alterations. The Essay closes with a discussion of the somewhat surprising potential that §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment offers for originalist law reform when situated within a framework of judicial departmentalism. Originalism provides both a foundation for understanding the breadth of Congress's enforcement power under §5 and also a means of grounding enforcement legislation other than existing judicial doctrine. The combination of judicial departmentalism and originalism can be particularly potent for generating originalist law reform in areas in which existing judicial doctrine underenforces substantive Fourteenth Amendment protections when measured against the original law of the Fourteenth Amendment.
