Search results

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

This paper aims to provide empirical evidence on the extent of alteration institutional characteristics, i.e. legal origin and corruption levels, may have on the signaling effects of auditors’ reputation, underwriters’ reputation and ownership retention on initial public offering (IPO) initial returns in OECD countries.

Cross-sectional data composed of 6,182 IPOs from 30 OECD countries are used for 2003-2012. Ordinary least square with multiple linear regressions is used to test the hypotheses.

The findings indicate that the legal framework and corruption level of a country alters the signaling effects of underwriters’ reputation, auditors’ reputation and ownership retention in an IPO environment. These three variables mitigate information asymmetry, signal firm value to potential investors and ultimately decrease IPO initial returns. This relationship is more significant in the civil law countries. Corruption levels negatively moderate the relationship in the common law and Scandinavian civil law countries but have no significance in the German and French civil law countries, indicating the importance of the signaling variables in these two civil law countries.

This study examines the extent of the alterations that the legal framework and the corruption levels cause to the signaling relationship between auditors’ reputation, underwriters’ reputation and ownership retention on IPO initial returns in selected OECD countries.

In a high‐profile case that first drew big media headlines last February, a New York brokerage firm and a ring of eight brokers on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange were charged with perpetrating a scheme in which they made over $11.1m in illegal profits and at the same time covered their tracks with an elaborate fraud.

Using Bulgarian legislation on civil confiscation and analysing the nature of the substantive authority to confiscate unexplained wealth, as well as evaluating research in common and continental law, this paper aims to seek historic parallels for non-punitive civil confiscation of unexplained wealth.

The design of this paper is centred on determining whether the substantive authority of the state to confiscate unexplained wealth has a Roman law equivalent. Conducting a review of key elements of the substantive authority for the action in Bulgaria, the research examines the validity of the hypothesis that the right to confiscate has a Roman law equivalent.

The research supports the position that the substantive authority to seek civil confiscation relief in Bulgaria has its origin in the overarching principle of unjustified enrichment in Roman law. Considering needed adjustments related to the developed demarcation between public and private law in contemporary law, the action to confiscate unexplained wealth in civil proceedings in the case study jurisdiction has its equivalent in the Roman condictio furtiva.

This paper sheds light on the theoretical basis for civil asset confiscation of unexplained wealth in one continental law jurisdiction, thus contributing to the on-going debate on the compatibility of civil confiscation of unexplained wealth with the continental law tradition.

‘It is incorrect to view the recovery of the profits of unlawful activity as a part of the criminal justice process and, as such, justifiable only on the basis of a prior finding of guilt according to the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.’

The article aims to provide a discussion of societal norms concerning “attractiveness,” the existence of appearance discrimination in employment, the presence of “preferring the pretty”, and then the authors examine important civil rights laws that relate to such forms of discrimination. Finally, the authors apply ethical theories to determine whether such discrimination can be seen as moral or immoral.

It is a legal paper which covers all the laws related to discrimination based on look. Court cases and Americans laws related to this concept are reviewed and critically discussed.

The paper finds that appearance‐based discrimination is not illegal in the USA so long as it does not violate civil rights laws.

This research is limited to Federal and State laws in the USA and may not be relevant in other countries as the local laws might vary.

Managers and employees can protect themselves in the workplace from illegal discriminatory practices.

Employees know their rights and enhance their understanding of laws related to appearance, attractiveness, and why companies look to hire those who are considered “handsome”, “pretty” and “beautiful”.

This is an original and comprehensive paper by the authors.

The argument is presented that, is contrast to expectations, the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA) of 2000 will not be responsible for significant change in the practice of civil asset forfeiture, that the Act is a sheep in wolf's clothing. While it has ushered in some important procedural changes, CAFRA does not address several of what critics perceive to be the most significant problems associated with civil asset forfeiture, among them are a questionable standard of proof, equitable sharing, and the so‐called “taint doctrine.” Thus, it is likely that civil asset forfeiture will continue to be a valuable law enforcement tool in the war on drugs.

North Korea joined the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) as a 90th member on March 27, 2019, which will necessitate the understanding of North Korean laws, in particular, the contract law for sale. This paper aims to compare the CISG and the North Korean contract law as to the formation of a contract focusing on form and writing requirement, offer and acceptance.

This paper analyzes the provisions of the North Korean Civil Code and the CISG and reviews the previous research studies concerning the formation of a contract.

The CISG and the North Korean Civil Code are very similar in many aspects as to the formation of a contract. However, there are some discrepancies as to the formation of a contract to which the parties need to pay attention in choosing the governing law.

The parties need to pay attention to the differences concerning the formation of a contract between the North Korean Civil Code and the CISG in concluding a contract for sale with North Korea.

This paper will be the first research work, to the best of the author’s knowledge, on the comparison of the CISG and the North Korean contract law as to the formation of a contract.

Presents a special issue, enlisting the help of the author’s students and colleagues, focusing on age, sex, colour and disability discrimination in America. Breaks the evidence down into manageable chunks, covering: age discrimination in the workplace; discrimination against African‐Americans; sex discrimination in the workplace; same sex sexual harassment; how to investigate and prove disability discrimination; sexual harassment in the military; when the main US job‐discrimination law applies to small companies; how to investigate and prove racial discrimination; developments concerning race discrimination in the workplace; developments concerning the Equal Pay Act; developments concerning discrimination against workers with HIV or AIDS; developments concerning discrimination based on refusal of family care leave; developments concerning discrimination against gay or lesbian employees; developments concerning discrimination based on colour; how to investigate and prove discrimination concerning based on colour; developments concerning the Equal Pay Act; using statistics in employment discrimination cases; race discrimination in the workplace; developments concerning gender discrimination in the workplace; discrimination in Japanese organizations in America; discrimination in the entertainment industry; discrimination in the utility industry; understanding and effectively managing national origin discrimination; how to investigate and prove hiring discrimination based on colour; and, finally, how to investigate sexual harassment in the workplace.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interaction between legal origin and cultural distance and its impact on foreign direct investment (FDI) flows into the OECD.

Ordinary least squares regression analysis is used to evaluate FDI flows into OECD countries between 2003 and 2012. Estimations use fixed effects and clustered standard errors.

FDI flows from civil to common law countries are greater than vice versa. Further, cultural distance impacts FDI flows depending on the legal origin of the source country. Specifically, more FDI flows from civil and common law countries, when the host country has a higher (lower) power distance (individualism) score. Civil law countries send more FDI into countries with higher masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and indulgence scores and with lower long-term orientation scores. The opposite is the case with common law source countries. The findings remain robust for various changes to the sample selection.

The concepts of cultural distance and legal origin have been criticized. However, neither concept has been rejected; rather, both concepts persist as robust empirical research tools.

Scholars, managers and investors can gauge the impact of cultural distance on FDI flows based on the legal family of the source country. Further, policy makers might want to consider rebranding their countries in terms of cultural perceptions to show the attractiveness of specific cultural dimensions to foreign companies and investors.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that jointly investigates FDI, legal origin and national culture.