Search

The article provides a scientific and practical analysis of international legal aspects relating to the issue of determining the exclusive jurisdiction of a dispute by means of a choice of court agreement, which is quite relevant, since the ratification of the relevant Convention, which was signed in 2014, took place during the martial law regime, which complicates the process of implementing the provisions of the Convention in the Ukrainian legal system. The author analyses the current Ukrainian legislation in the area of determining the jurisdiction of private law relations with a foreign element, in particular, proceedings in cases related to the jurisdiction determination procedure, and international documents in the area of choice of court agreements, such as the Laws of Ukraine «On International Private Law», «On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine in connection with the Ratification of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements», the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The author identifies certain problems of enforcement of the choice of court agreement in the judicial system of Ukraine and issues of procedural protection of the parties to the agreement. It is noted that currently there is no definition of an exclusive choice of court agreement in national legislation and there are problems in the enforcement of a Ukrainian court decision by other states where no agreement on legal assistance has been concluded. The difficulty of applying the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements in comparison with the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards has been proven, which may lead to differences in the practice of use among the countries that are parties to the Convention. The author identifies the need to expand Article 4-1 of the Law of Ukraine «On Private International Law» and improve the implementation of disputes involving an exclusive choice of court agreement. The author emphasises the need to resolve problematic issues, as this will positively affect the international legal image of the state and prepare further legislative changes for more effective synthesis of the legal systems of Ukraine and the EU member states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Class actions play an important role in civil litigation, but they suffer from a serious problem. No matter how many plaintiffs are in the class, the individual claims are often miniscule, which can make distributing the inevitable settlement futile. Very few people make a claim, and it often costs more to mail the check than the check is worth. To solve this problem, Steven Shepherd proposed importing the cy pres doctrine (a trusts and estates device that allows courts to rewrite an unenforceable trust) into the class actions context. Shepherd's framework instructs courts to devise the next best alternative for distributing the funds from a class action settlement. Oftentimes, this will involve donating the money to a charity whose work aligns with the policy goals of the statute creating the cause of action. Courts across the country have adopted this framework with open arms, and the doctrine has developed a mind of its own. Courts are now bending over backwards to approve these cy pres settlements, often overlooking clear legal errors, glaring public policy concerns, and flagrant ethical violations to justify them. But there is a more fundamental problem: cy pres is unconstitutional. Rule number one of federal jurisdiction is that plaintiffs must satisfy the "irreducible constitutional minimum" of Article III standing to sue. Plaintiffs lack standing when the requested remedy would not redress the harm, and cy pres settlements do not redress the harm the class has suffered. This Note argues courts should replace cy pres with an escheatment scheme that ensures class actions redress the plaintiffs' harms. Escheatment serves the twin goals of both ensuring the class members receive their money (thereby satisfying the redressability requirement) while also preventing the egregious misconduct many attorneys engage in while negotiating these settlements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The word “abortion” pervades public discourse in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But do people know what it means? Not only do law and medicine define it differently, but state legislatures have codified wildly different definitions of abortion across jurisdictions. This Article exposes inherent ambiguities at the boundaries of the term, particularly as it intersects with other categories of reproductive health care often viewed as separate, like pregnancy loss and ectopic pregnancy. By juxtaposing statutory text with real people’s experiences of being denied care in states with abortion bans, this Article reveals how those ambiguities cause tragic results. This Article’s analysis also tracks how antiabortion legislatures have responded to the tragedies of their own making by changing the definition of abortion. Thirteen abortion-hostile states have changed the definition of abortion since Dobbs, eleven of which have added at least one definitional exclusion, most commonly for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, or molar pregnancy. States that have expanded abortion rights, on the other hand, have moved in the opposite direction, broadening their abortion definitions as they expand reproductive rights. The findings from this Article have a variety of normative implications. First, they demonstrate that “abortion” is an ambiguous term that lacks a fixed meaning. Given that many abortion bans and the long-unenforced Comstock Act leave the term undefined, courts will need to consider canons of construction, context, and history to resolve the term’s ambiguity. Second, the findings strongly support the conclusion that state abortion definitions and ban exceptions are unconstitutionally vague. This analysis cuts against a predominate antiabortion narrative that the laws are clear, yet doctors are willfully or unintentionally misinterpreting them. Finally, the findings underscore how Dobbs created an unworkable framework that moved the complicated experience of pregnancy from the medical to the legal domain, strengthening calls to overturn the decision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The essay critiques the Supreme Court's novel approach toward statutory construction in Sackett (2023). The Sackett Court considered whether the Ninth Circuit applied the appropriate test to determine whether the Sackett's property contained wetlands regulated under the Clean Water Act (CWA). In doing so, the Court cast aside what has been considered the operative test for assessing jurisdiction, the significant nexus test. In lieu of that test, the majority articulated a considerably constrained understanding of the CWA's reach. This essay explores how it reached that understanding and why some of the Justices' analyses are as problematic as the operative conclusion. I explain why the majority opinion and one of the concurring opinions not only shunned any typical analysis when construing a statute, it ostensibly relied on history surrounding navigability without portraying that history with any semblance of thoroughness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This note describes the sources and methods used to calculate the emissions-weighted carbon price (ECP), the average price applied to CO2 emissions across all sources of emissions within a territorial jurisdiction by all carbon pricing mechanisms in force. It provides a transparent summary of the stringency of carbon pricing mechanisms in force within a given jurisdiction and allows for a straightforward comparison of that stringency across jurisdictions. It also describes the methodology behind two closely connected calculations: (i) sector-level carbon prices (by IPCC categories of emissions by sources and by categories of economic activity, respectively), (ii) industry- and country-level carbon costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

High forest low deforestation jurisdictions (HFLDs) contain many of the world's last intact forests with historically low deforestation. Since carbon financing typically uses historical deforestation rates as baselines, HFLDs facing the prospect of future threats may receive insufficient incentives to be protected. We found that from 2002 to 2020, HFLDs (n = 310) experienced 44% higher deforestation rates than their historical baselines, and 60 HFLDs underwent periods of high deforestation (deforestation rate > 0.501%) at 0.983 ± 0.649% (mean ± SD)--a rate 7.5 times higher than the 10-y historical baseline of all HFLDs. For HFLDs to receive sufficient carbon finance requires baselines that can better reflect future deforestation trajectories of HFLDs. Using an empirical multifactorial model, we show that most contemporary HFLDs are expected to undergo higher deforestation from 2020 to 2038 than their historical baselines, with 72 HFLDs likely (>66% probability) to undergo high deforestation. Over the next 18 y, HFLDs are expected to lose 2.16 Mha y-1 of forests corresponding to 585 ± 74 MtCO2e y-1 (mean ± SE) of emissions. Efforts to protect HFLD forests from future threats will be crucial. In particular, improving baselining methods is key to ensuring that sufficient financing can flow to HFLDs to prevent deforestation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Around the country, jurisdictions are exploring new routes to expand access to justice by empowering community justice workers to provide legal services. Though such activities are often regarded as new, some have existed for decades -people without law licenses have long been authorized to provide representation in immigration matters, Tribal courts, and for those incarcerated in prisons and jails, as well as before a wide range of state and federal administrative agencies and otherfora. Recent eforts are seeking to expand community justice work, both by enlarging the labor force of justice workers and by empowering them to provide more useful and impactful legal assistance. For example, in November 2022, the Alaska Supreme Court approved a waiver of unauthorized practice of law restrictions that will allow Alaska Legal Services Corporation (ALSC), the largest civil legal aid provider in the state, to train and supervise community justice workers who live throughout Alaska's many rural and remote communities, including many where no attorneys live or even visit. Delaware's legislature took action on a key inequality in landlord-tenant law: in the past, landlords were permitted to employ non-lawyers for representation, but tenants were required to represent themselves or find an attorney. Delaware corrected this by permitting registered agents to appear in court on both sides of an eviction case. Andfornearlyfour years, the Utah Supreme Court has been operating the world'sfirst legal services regulatory sandbox, a regulatory space where traditional rules restricting legal advice and advocacy to lawyers can be relaxed in an environment where consumer protection is monitored in real time. This paper reviews established community justice worker models that have been serving low-income and excluded communities in the United States for more than 50 years, including accredited immigration representatives, Tribal lay advocates, and jailhouse lawyers and emerging justice worker models advanced in Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, and Utah in the last five years. These real-world activities offer opportunities for learning about whatfactors make justice work not only effective at resolving people's justice problems or encouraging their engagement with law, but also what makes justice worker programs sustainable over the long term and scalable to meet the enormous volume of Americans' unmet legal needs. To encourage that learning, we offer a people-centered and evidence-based framework for designing and evaluating community justice worker models that focus on program effectiveness, scalability, and sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Duress, which in principle can invalidate a contract, is recognized in both civil and common law systems. In Rwanda, while duress is addressed under the law on contracts, the Rwandan law lacks a precise definition of it, leading to potential inconsistencies in its application. This paper explores the conceptual ambiguities in Rwandan contract law regarding duress, specifically whether it must be physical or not, whether it must necessarily arise from an illegitimate act, and whether it can be exerted by or to third parties. Through a normative approach, the paper focusses exclusively on contractual duress and seeks to illuminate these grey areas by examining Rwandan legal texts, judicial precedents, and insights from other jurisdictions. The goal is to provide a clearer framework for understanding and applying the concept of duress in Rwandan contract law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Russia–Ukraine conflict has grabbed the world's attention as a grave breach of a state's sovereignty. Among the several implications of the conflict, it has opened a Pandora's box with counsel and law firms resigning from representing Russia and Russian entities in international legal proceedings including arbitrations. Counsel resignation, once completely within the decision-making of clients and counsel, has grown into an issue that requires third-party deliberations and adjudication. Though trite in law that a counsel and a client have mutual rights to end professional ties between each other, a counsel's voluntary resignation in arbitration remains unexplored. This necessitates a global discussion as it directly encroaches upon the fundamental rule of law that every person has the right to be represented and defended. Thus, counsel resignation has been elevated to a moral quandary of professional obligations. The aim of this article is to draw a broad outline of the present legal position on counsel resignations, the conundrums surrounding it, and the scope of an arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction to interfere in these matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the implementation of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration in 1985, its jurisprudence has been developed in a broad array of aspects amongst which is the distinction between jurisdiction and admissibility. It has been said that the distinction is a useful tool in adjudicating the issue of whether an arbitral award should be set aside by a domestic court—but is it necessarily so? In C v D (2023) 26 HKCFAR 216, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal had the opportunity to revisit the usefulness of the distinction. Given that the Court was divided on the issue, C v D not only provides two lines of thought for the international arbitration community to reflect on the distinction between jurisdiction and admissibility but also provides a reference for Model Law jurisdictions in deciding future cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Environmental & Social Management Journal / Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental is the property of Environmental & Social Management Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The search for rare minerals is taking us well beyond the bounds of national jurisdiction, and international law is struggling to keep up. In the 1970s states agreed that the deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction was the “common heritage of mankind,” a doctrine that was ultimately codified in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The common heritage doctrine has, from the outset, been something of a chimera. And fears over its association with redistributive economic policies led to the failure of an agreement regulating activities on the moon. Yet the doctrine exists as a going concern in international law. Deep seabed mining is on track to begin in 2024. The United Nations is presently considering international rules for asteroid and lunar mining. And efforts to protect marine biodiversity continue to rely on the idea that certain resources are our common heritage. If states are to deal productively with any of these issues, we need a revitalized approach to the common heritage doctrine. Instead of embodying a static set of legal precepts, I argue for a flexible understanding of the common heritage doctrine rooted in theories of commons property that is sensitive to the peculiarities of specific natural resources. A fruitful exemplar of such an approach is the public trust doctrine of U.S. property law. Sharing with the common heritage doctrine a common foundation in Roman principles of common property, the public trust doctrine recognizes that governments hold certain natural resources in trust for the beneficial use of their citizens. By imposing this duty, and by limiting the purposes for which governments can use these resources, the public trust doctrine is a prototypical example of property as a set of governance rules. Drawing on the public trust doctrine’s rich common law and scholarly history, I propose a four-part framework for a public trust approach to the common heritage doctrine. To demonstrate the opportunities made available by this approach, I take outer space mining as a case study and I propose steps that states can take to incrementally govern resource extraction in a manner more likely to attract international consensus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the population increases, spending on publicly provided goods must also increase if there is congestion and governments want to maintain provision of the same level of benefit to everyone. This article estimates a parameter capturing this impact of congestion for the state and local component of the general government sector in Australia. It shows the congestion parameter is likely to be between 0.51 and 0.84 implying super congestion and/or decreasing returns to scale have dominated the supply of these goods. The per person cost of congestion has been rising and differs across states. Larger jurisdictions also have relatively higher per person congestion costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the topical issues of doctrine and international judicial practice regarding the determination of the State's responsibility for international wrongful acts, in particular, those related to the activities of foreign non-State armed groups. The authors analyse the international legal framework of State responsibility for international wrongful acts, as well as individual criminal liability of individuals. The paper substantiates a set of economic and legal instruments for the implementation of international responsibility (reparations, satisfaction, restitution, economic sanctions) as a mechanism for ensuring compliance with international law by States. The study identifies the legal positions of the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the European Court of Human Rights and other international judicial institutions on the application of the concepts of "effective control" and "overall control" in judicial practice, as well as problematic issues of law enforcement.

The purpose of the article is to identify the peculiarities of combating collaborationism in the context of armed conflicts and to highlight the main areas for improving criminological policy in this area. It is established that collaborationism, in a broad sense, is a complex criminal phenomenon that arises as a result of the interaction of subjects of the communication process (individuals, certain organisations) or voluntary or forced cooperation with the aggressor. In a narrow sense, it is an act, the characteristics of which are defined, in particular, in Art. 111-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and which undermine the national security of Ukraine, pose a direct threat to the state sovereignty, territorial integrity, constitutional order and other national interests of Ukraine, and/or constitute conscious, voluntary and deliberate cooperation with the enemy in its interests and/or to the detriment of the state and its allies in the form of public denial by a citizen of Ukraine of armed aggression against Ukraine, establishment and confirmation of the temporary occupation of a part of the territory of Ukraine, or public calls by a citizen of Ukraine to support the decisions and/or actions of the aggressor state, armed formations and/or occupation administration of the aggressor state, to cooperate with the aggressor state, armed formations and/or occupation administration of the aggressor state, not to recognise the extension of the state sovereignty of Ukraine to the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. It is emphasised that with the entry into force of the Laws of Ukraine "On Criminalisation of Collaboration" and "On Amendments to the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine to Improve Liability for Collaboration and Peculiarities of Application of Preventive Measures for Crimes Against the Fundamentals of National and Public Security" (2022), Ukraine has generally created a legal framework for preventing collaboration in the state. Results. The analysis has revealed the existence of problematic issues in countering collaboration in the current context of the armed conflict in Ukraine and allowed to propose ways of solving them, in particular the need to amend the sanctions of the Criminal Code to classify collaboration as a serious crime, since according to the Criminal Procedure Code the vast majority of covert investigative actions are carried out exclusively in criminal proceedings for serious or particularly serious crimes. These amendments will make it possible to properly document the criminal actions of "collaborators" and to significantly expand the legal scope of evidence collection in these crimes to include not only educational, but also cultural, athletic and sports institutions in the scope of collaboration, which will make it possible to investigate the dissemination of information in educational, cultural, sports and physical culture institutions aimed at distorting facts, historical culture and/or events, as such assimilation of Ukrainian children may lead to the loss of their national identity. It is expedient to change the construction of the provision, which is in line with the principle of legal certainty, and define the prohibited types of legal activities. Such a list is also provided for in the Law of Ukraine "On Ensuring Civil Rights and Freedoms, and the Legal Regime on the Temporarily Occupied Territory of Ukraine" (2014); Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine provides for alternative jurisdiction for pre-trial investigation of a criminal offence. In particular, in criminal proceedings on collaboration, the pre-trial investigation is carried out by the investigator of the body that initiated the investigation.

This article examines the jurisdictional status of the internet. Because of the underly ing nature of technology, nations cannot effectively monitor online transactions that originate or conclude within their borders. Governments can seek to enforce their laws within the constraints of their physical, geographical, and political domains as defined by an atlas, but a borderless cyberworld regulated by fast -expanding technology has a variety of challenges. This study sheds light on those challenges, the jurisdiction for parties to suit, the remedies accessible to them, and the territorial concerns discussed in various domestic courts. It also focuses on the pressures on stakeholders to act, as well as the economic, human rights, and techno logical infrastructure implications of jurisdictional concerns. In general, jurisdictional issues on the internet have resulted in haphazard and unrestricted jurisdictional implementations, and this article emphasizes the territorial difficulties of internet administration and its direct influence on many nations and elements.

The Hague Conference on Private International Law (hereinafter - "Conference") has played a pivotal role in the development and unification of jurisdictional rules in private international law. This paper examines the outcomes of the Conference various conventions, focusing on their impact on harmonizing jurisdictional frameworks among member states. By analyzing key conventions, such as the 1965 Hague Convention on Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents, the 1970 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, and the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, this research highlights how these instruments address conflicts of laws and jurisdictional disputes in cross-border cases. The paper further explores the challenges faced in implementing these conventions, including differing national interpretations and the influence of domestic legal systems on international agreements. Through comparative analysis, it evaluates the effectiveness of these conventions in reducing forum shopping and ensuring more predictable outcomes for parties involved in international disputes. Moreover, this study reflects on the future prospects for further unification of jurisdiction rules, considering emerging trends such as globalization, digitalization, and the increasing complexity of cross-border legal issues. The research aims to contribute to the discourse on private international law by providing insights into the Conference achievements and identifying areas where further efforts are needed to enhance the coherence and effectiveness of jurisdictional rules. Ultimately, the findings underscore the significance of international cooperation in resolving jurisdictional challenges and advancing the uniform application of private international law principles. The success of the Hague Conference, however, hinges not only on the adoption of conventions but also on the degree to which states integrate these instruments into their domestic legal frameworks. Inconsistencies in ratification and divergent national practices often dilute the intended harmonization, creating gaps in enforcement and legal uncertainty. Some major economies have yet to ratify key conventions, limiting their global reach and diminishing the benefits of predictability and uniformity. These obstacles highlight the need for stronger mechanisms to monitor and encourage compliance, along with the development of flexible frameworks that can accommodate diverse legal traditions while still promoting convergence. Enhanced dialogue among member states and targeted technical assistance could foster broader participation, ensuring that the potential of the Conference's conventions is fully realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the analysis of the institute of control in international law as one of the elements for attributing the behaviour of a separatist entity or other anti-governmental organisation to the state in the process of bringing the latter to international legal responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, primarily massive human rights violations. The author emphasises the growing importance of the issue of control in the context of modern armed conflicts, where ‘proxy’ forces are increasingly used, acting formally independently but in fact controlled by states. This raises new challenges for international law, especially in the area of human rights protection, including during armed conflicts, and State responsibility. The article examines the provisions of some international instruments relating to the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, and in particular those provisions which provide for attribution of conduct of individuals or groups of individuals acting ‘at the direction’, or ‘under the direction’, or ‘under the control’ of the State. The article discusses three main concepts of control, namely: strict control, effective control and general control. The authors analyse in detail the history of the emergence and development of each concept, as well as explain the main differences between them, and reveal their strengths and weaknesses. It is argued that strict control requires complete dependence of the organisation on the state, while effective control allows for autonomy of the organisation, but requires a certain influence of the state on its actions. Overall control emphasises the importance of structured interaction between the state and the group. The authors provide examples of the application of these concepts in the practice of international justice bodies, including the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, highlighting the difference in approaches to assessing control and responsibility of states. These examples demonstrate the difficulty of proving a certain level of control, which affects the resolution of disputes in international courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is indicated that the problem of determining and changing the jurisdiction of a specific body of pre-trial investigation has always been relevant among Ukrainian procedural scientists and practical workers. In recent years, this topic has become extremely important, because the number of bodies authorized to conduct pre-trial investigations has increased in Ukraine. The author analyses the approaches of various procedural scholars to the definition of the category of «subject matter jurisdiction». The author notes that jurisdiction makes it possible to distribute criminal proceedings both between separate pre-trial investigation bodies and between separate units within one pre-trial investigation body. The jurisdiction of criminal proceedings is only one of the elements of competence which determines the subject matter of jurisdiction of a particular pre-trial investigation body. The relevance of the study of the investigative jurisdiction of criminal proceedings is due to the fact that in the science of criminal procedure there are numerous differences in approaches to understanding the essence of this legal category in general and ways to solve certain problems of delimitation of the competence of pre-trial investigation bodies in particular. The problems existing in law enforcement practice in determining the jurisdiction of criminal proceedings can hardly be explained solely by subjective factors, namely, by the misapplication of criminal procedure legislation by individual officials. The author focuses on the rulings of the Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court, which set out clear criteria for recognising a pre-trial investigation as effective. In addition, the author summarises the approaches proposed by scholars to the application of the provisions of the criminal procedure law regulating the institute of jurisdiction over criminal proceedings. The author examines the main components of the legal institute of criminal proceedings’ jurisdiction, their features and properties. It is also necessary to introduce restrictions on challenging the jurisdiction of criminal proceedings by participants to criminal proceedings, since this contradicts the general principles of criminal proceedings [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mental health is an important aspect at every stage of life, from childhood to adolescence and to old age. It is crucial to people’s overall well-being. In various studies that have been conducted, it has been found that a significant number of child offenders experienced some form of mental health problem or issue. This awareness has led to many countries adopting mental health screening as a part of the admission procedure into juvenile institutions. It has been argued that such a practice can benefit child offenders as it not only allows for the early detection of any underlying mental health issues but also assists the relevant authorities in personalising rehabilitation programmes that are unique for each child offender. Little is known about the regulatory approach taken by Malaysia and whether or not the existing practice, if any, is in line with other experienced jurisdictions at the international level. Hence, this article examines the laws and policies regarding mental health screening for child offenders admitted into juvenile institutions in Malaysia with a comparison made with other selected jurisdictions namely the United States of America, New Zealand, and the Netherlands. This study found that significant differences exist between Malaysia and selected jurisdictions such as the timing of mental health screening or the mental health screening tools utilised, and therefore, proposes some measures that can be learned and adopted by Malaysia to improve its child justice system and ensure the well-being of child offenders admitted into juvenile institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Necmettin Erbakan University School of Law Review is the property of Necmettin Erbakan University School of Law Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Do network connections between government officials and administrative units facilitate efficient land use contracting across jurisdictions? This article leverages data from a groundbreaking policy in China where a strict quota-bound land use policy was replaced with an alternative, allowing between-county trade in land conversion quotas. We unpack the determinants of the boundary between trading and autarkic jurisdictions and unveil leader-related drivers of transaction costs between jurisdictions in a gravity-style estimation. We catalogue personal and career histories of county-level leaders and present evidence that leader networks derived from employment history are robustly trade-facilitating but nonworkplace links are not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transplantation of European legal systems in the periphery often occurred via semi‐colonial institutions, where Europeans were subject to their own jurisdictions that placed them outside the reach of local courts. In nineteenth‐century Egypt, the option of extraterritoriality was extended to local non‐Muslims. Drawing on Egypt's population censuses in 1848 and 1868, we show that locals did not seek extraterritoriality to place themselves under more efficient jurisdictions. Rather, legal protection mitigated uncertainty about which law would apply to any contractual relationship in an environment where multiple legal systems co‐existed and overlapped. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) frequently lauds its Pillar 2 project as a cooperative global effort to ensure that large multinational enterprises pay a minimum tax regardless of where they are headquartered and regardless of the jurisdiction where their operations are located. The United States and at least 137 other nations have all agreed that global tax cooperation is consistent with their fiscal interests and their fiscal priorities. However, one should remember the admonition that "the devil is often in the details." This Article dives into the details of the Pillar 2 model rules, identifying those areas where the model rules are deficient and where further reforms to the GloBE rules are necessary to ensure achievement of the agreed-upon aspirational goal. The Article also sets forth how the United States and other like-minded nations should respond during this interim period where design deficiencies remain in the Pillar 2 model rules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article looks at the emergence of systemic mitigation cases, a subset of climate litigation in which plaintiffs use international human rights law to argue that states are in breach of their positive obligations to protect human rights by failing to take more aggressive emission reductions. These systemic mitigation cases are premised on an evolutionary interpretation of human rights treaties, which takes into account the realities of climate change. The soundness of such evolutionary interpretation is assessed using the Dworkinian concept of multiple intentions, whereby human rights treaties are explained to embody not one monolithic intention by treaty parties, but rather, layers of intention at differing levels of generality which may come in conflict. The evolutionary interpretation being advocated in systemic mitigation cases, while consistent with some intentions, is also in conflict with others. This Article focuses on the conflicts, particularly in relation to the evolutionary interpretation of a state's extraterritorial jurisdiction and a state's due diligence obligations, to explain the shortcomings of the current approach, especially in relation to the developing world context. This Article further suggests how these conflicts may be managed to enhance the potency of systemic mitigation cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inflicting electric shock on a horse can cause significant pain for which they are not adapted. This is recognised in the animal welfare legislation of all Australian jurisdictions, which prohibit the use of electrical devices on horses. However, rodeo horses are exempted from this protection in some jurisdictions. This article analyses the regulatory framework to determine if legislative exemptions result in different legal protections for horses depending on whether they are used in rodeos or horse racing. It also considers instances of actual use of electrical devices on horses to determine whether the current regulatory framework is capable of enforcement. It argues that possession of electric prodders near horses at rodeos should be made an offence in all jurisdictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2022, New South Wales ('NSW') became the first Australian jurisdiction to criminalise coercive control, with the offence commencing on 1 July 2024. This follows the creation of similar offences overseas. These novel offences are designed to respond to the extensive critique of the criminal law which has largely focused on discrete incidents of physical violence leaving absent the full range and pattern of abuse experienced as domestic and family violence. In legislating in this area, the NSW Government sought to balance key tensions that emerged in the debates about criminalisation, such as: not to over-reach; the risk of victims being misidentified as offenders; the over-criminalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; while at the same time addressing coercive control. In this article, I critically examine the NSW offence drawing attention to various misunderstandings about coercive control and misidentification that appear to underpin the NSW approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International sports governing bodies (SGBs) such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) are incorporated as either limited liability companies or non-profit entities in a single jurisdiction, with the latter being the more prevalent model. Non-profit SBGs engage in at least four types of commercial activity, namely: a) conferring on states by means of contract the right to host tournaments or events under their aegis, which in turn generates revenues; b) broadcasting, image, and sponsorship rights; c) portfolio investment (i.e. purchase of shares, stocks, debentures and other intangible assets) with surplus revenue; and d) developmental and outreach activities with a view to grow their fan and athlete base and thus generate profits from the above commercial activities. Even though SGBs can secure agreements with host states that contain personalized investment guarantees (in most cases far superior to treaty-based guarantees), neither they nor participating states (e.g. tournament hosts) view SGB investors under applicable bilateral investment treaties (BITs) or host state investment laws. This is puzzling, because with very few exceptions, BITs and Model BITs either expressly recognize non-profit entities as investors, or otherwise do not expressly exclude them from their ambit so long as they engage in some commercial activity. The four aforementioned types of commercial activity clearly constitute investments. SGBs refrain from being characterized as investors out of fear of losing their non-profit status, which in turn shields them from taxes and confers significant privileges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1767, the New Towns were founded with the benefit of a new Town Charter. Under the government of the superintendent Pablo de Olavide, the lands of towns and places of royalty, but also of lordship, were expropriated and came under his jurisdiction. In Sierra Morena, an estate belonging to the Marquises of La Rambla, known as La Aliseda, was not expropriated. Our aim in this paper is to highlight the relations between this estate and the (Super)intendancy of Nuevas Poblaciones, analysing the problems of jurisdiction, together with the relations between the Marquises of La Rambla and the neo-populational rulers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the public trust doctrine, the government holds public lands in trust for the public and cannot unreasonably restrict citizens from accessing them or otherwise breach its duties as a trustee. The public trust doctrine is often thought of as a state law doctrine. However, local governments own a significant portion of public land. Some local governments argue that the public trust doctrine does not apply to them because the state is the proper trustee under the public trust doctrine. This Comment argues that the public trust doctrine applies to local governments. State law preempts local government law on matters of statewide concern, and because the public trust doctrine is a matter of statewide concern, the public trust doctrine preempts local government action that contravenes the public trust doctrine. Similarly, as agents of the state, local governments may not take action that the public trust doctrine prohibits the state from taking. This Comment starts by discussing those principles of Local government law, and then examines Kramer v. City of Lake Oswego, a recent case in Oregon that demonstrates how one state supreme court overturned the appellate court decision that declined to apply the public trust doctrine to local governments. This Comment also surveys six jurisdictions that expressly apply the public trust doctrine to local governments. Litigants can use the courts' reasoning in these cases to expand the application of the public trust doctrine to local governments in other jurisdictions that have not yet decided the issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Annual of the Faculty of Law / Godišnjak Fakulteta Pravnih Nauka is the property of Pan-European University Apeiron and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)