Latour en Woolgars Laboratory Life (1979, tweede editie 1986) toont wetenschapssociologen hoe zij de constructie van de feitelijke inhoud van wetenschap kunnen beschrijven en analyseren.
De lockdown van 2020-2021 is slechts een generale repetitie voor wat ons door klimaatverandering te wachten staat, betoogt Bruno Latour. Gerard de Vries bespreekt zijn laatste boek.
ABSTRACT: Civil- and common-law systems are asserted to treat the right of a party to a contract to specific performance in quite different ways: in civil-law systems, this right seems to be a fundamental right of a creditor, emanating from the adagium 'pacta sunt servanda' itself; common-law systems, on the contrary, are supposed to grant this action to the creditors only in the exceptional case that their usual remedy, damages, would not achieve appropriate justice. One might expect that this well-known divergence between the before-said law systems has posed quite a problem to the draughtsmen of the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR); since it is to serve as an international instrument, unitary rules were needed, and therefore, it might be expected that its draughtsmen have reached a laborious compromise between the before-said law systems in a laborious way. The following questions will be addressed: does this divergence between civil- and common-law systems exist realiter and, if so, how has it been bridged in the DCFR? In order to answer these questions, rights of a party to a contract of monetary obligations have been distinguished from rights to non-monetary ones. It will turn out with respect to each of these types of obligations that the beforesaid divergence between civil- and common-law systems is not as wide as might have been expected. The remaining divergences between the law systems have been bridged by the draughtsmen of the DCFR in different ways, dependent on the type of obligation at stake. With respect to monetary obligations, they have chosen for the common-law solution, that is, damages instead of a right to specific performance. With respect to non-monetary obligations, the civil-law solution that these draughtsmen have, on the contrary, chosen for the civil-law solution as the basic rule is the right to specific performance; their task to include the rights that the European Union confers on consumers in the DCFR may account for this latter choice.
In: Journal of risk research: the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan, Band 14, Heft 4, S. 485-499
This decision by the Bundesgerichtshof (German Supreme Court) was based on the following facts. The claimant sought to obtain from the first defendant the sum of ?3,916.32, being the remainder of a tax consultation fee. She initiated the action by a writ of summons dated 29 December 2000. During the court proceedings, the first defendant submitted that a claim for ?1,632.72, which had been awarded to him by an enforceable decision of the Amtsgericht (District Court) of Landshut dated March 2001, should be set off against the principal sum claimed. Thereupon the claimant unilaterally declared that the dispute had been settled for that amount, and claimed the remainder of the principal sum claimed. The declaration of settlement submitted by the claimant was dismissed by the District Court, on the grounds that the action had already been brought before court proceedings in the principal claim had commenced. Because of Article 389 of the German Civil Code, it was necessary to conclude that the action should be dismissed in the light of the time at which eligibility for set-off arose. The Court of Appeal, on the other hand, decided that the dispute should be regarded as settled to the amount of ?1,632.74. It was not the elibility for set-off, but the set-off declaration made during the court proceedings which constituted the decisive development which caused the action, which initially was admissible and well-founded, to become unfounded. The Supreme Court application brought against this decision by the first defendant was unsuccessful. The Supreme Court was of the view that, even though the set-off mechanism had retrospective effect under the substantive law (Article 389 Civil Code), it was the set-off declaration which constituted the ?decisive development? for an action which up to that point had been admissible and well-founded. It is only as from the moment when the set-off declaration is made that the substantive law effect of set-off, i.e. the extinction of the claim in the main action, is achieved. This effect is not yet achieved when the claim becomes eligible for set-off. The annotations below examine this decision from the perspective of Belgian, French, Greek, Dutch and Spanish law.
Ooit namen wij risico's als behorend bij het bestaan. Natuurrampen, ongelukken, dodelijke ziekten - ze hoorden er nu eenmaal bij. Tegenwoordig eisen we een leven in volstrekte veiligheid: pech moet weg. God is vervangen door de verzekeringsmaatschappij. Overkomt ons onverhoeds toch een ramp, dan wijzen we bij voorkeur naar de overheid. Zij had ons moeten beschermen. Maar hoe zit het met de verantwoordelijkheid van de burgers zelf?. Rond dit actuele thema organiseerde het Nederlands Gesprek Centrum een serie spraakmakende bijeenkomsten. Leven in de risicosamenleving is daarvan de weerslag. In p
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Treatment success measured by treatment outcome monitoring (TOM) is a key programmatic output of tuberculosis (TB) control programmes. We performed a systematic literature review on national-level TOM in the 30 European Union (EU)/European Economic Areas (EEA) countries to summarise methods used to collect and report data on TOM.
The International Standards for Tuberculosis Care define the essential level of care for managing patients who have or are presumed to have tuberculosis, or are at increased risk of developing the disease. The resources and capacity in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area permit higher standards of care to secure quality and timely TB diagnosis, prevention and treatment. On this basis, the European Union Standards for Tuberculosis Care (ESTC) were published in 2012 as standards specifically tailored to the EU setting. Since the publication of the ESTC, new scientific evidence has become available and, therefore, the standards were reviewed and updated.A panel of international experts, led by a writing group from the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), updated the ESTC on the basis of new published evidence. The underlying principles of these patient-centred standards remain unchanged. The second edition of the ESTC includes 21 standards in the areas of diagnosis, treatment, HIV and comorbidities, and public health and prevention.The ESTC target clinicians and public health workers, provide an easy-to-use resource and act as a guide through all the required activities to ensure optimal diagnosis, treatment and prevention of TB.
This paper describes an action framework for countries with low tuberculosis (TB) incidence (<100 TB cases per million population) that are striving for TB elimination. The framework sets out priority interventions required for these countries to progress first towards "pre-elimination" (<10 cases per million) and eventually the elimination of TB as a public health problem (less than one case per million). TB epidemiology in most low-incidence countries is characterised by a low rate of transmission in the general population, occasional outbreaks, a majority of TB cases generated from progression of latent TB infection (LTBI) rather than local transmission, concentration to certain vulnerable and hard-to-reach risk groups, and challenges posed by cross-border migration. Common health system challenges are that political commitment, funding, clinical expertise and general awareness of TB diminishes as TB incidence falls. The framework presents a tailored response to these challenges, grouped into eight priority action areas: 1) ensure political commitment, funding and stewardship for planning and essential services; 2) address the most vulnerable and hard-to-reach groups; 3) address special needs of migrants and cross-border issues; 4) undertake screening for active TB and LTBI in TB contacts and selected high-risk groups, and provide appropriate treatment; 5) optimise the prevention and care of drug-resistant TB; 6) ensure continued surveillance, programme monitoring and evaluation and case-based data management; 7) invest in research and new tools; and 8) support global TB prevention, care and control. The overall approach needs to be multisectorial, focusing on equitable access to high-quality diagnosis and care, and on addressing the social determinants of TB. Because of increasing globalisation and population mobility, the response needs to have both national and global dimensions.