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.

The paper aims to argue the case for the introduction of a global anti‐money laundering (AML) court. The proposed court as an institution can engender a rule‐based ethos as well as an environment for the transposition of AML regimes and requisite global changes into the society.

The paper was written by exploiting the significance of the court system to the development of any society. In particular, the paper draws on a pivotal role played by the European Court of Justice in enhancing economic integration of European member countries. Another example utilised by this paper was the dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) in the WTO. The DSM evolved an effective framework for settling international trade disputes and fundamentally helped to streamline the system. This paper is of the contention that the court would ease the adoption of global AML regimes and consequently ease the co‐existence of countries in relation to global AML initiatives.

The paper has delineated that any global initiatives either on money laundering (ML) or otherwise will have to reside in a form of institutional framework for them to work effectively. Short of that, it is possible that there will be enormous challenges for global AML regimes to function properly as envisaged.

The author is cognizant of the fact that states are still mandated to veto his prepositions based on the principle of sovereignty of nations. States can also refuse to lend their support – in its various dimensions to the proposed court.

It has to be noted that creating global AML regimes that are not going to work is not good enough and in case it amounts to a wastage of scarce resources that would better be utilised somewhere else.

ML in its various manifestations has far reaching consequences for lives of people wherever it is committed and should be accorded the seriousness it deserves.

The paper has been written based on the appreciation of the need to create enforcement mechanisms of engendered global AML/combating financing of terrorism (CFT) regimes. There are so many regimes masquerading as global, having been constituted with the mandate that give them a global reach and yet, they do not live up to their expectation.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of serendipity in legal information seeking behavior of family law advocates, whom act in a challenging information environment that lacks published court rulings.

A quantitative research using a web-based structured questionnaire, among Israeli family law advocates. Single stage systematic sampling, with random starting point and no recurring pattern of each sixth family law advocate on the Israel Bar Advocates List, was applied. Data from 135 Israeli family law advocates were used for analysis.

Electronic information sources were found as most serendipitous; family law advocates were identified as super encounterers; four types of professional background concerns and seven legal professional contributions of the unexpected encounters with court rulings, were identified. Furthermore, findings support several frameworks presented on earlier information encounter literature.

Data absence on demographic and professional variables distributions of Israeli family law advocates was a limiting factor, compensated by the systematic sampling method used, thus can be regarded to reflect the views of the entire study population. Surveys’ reliance on self-reporting recalls of serendipitous events is also a limiting factor, though predicted and acceptable in this matter since chance encounters occur unexpectedly and are complex to capture.

Chance encounters may expose lawyers to meaningful information it is unlikely they were able to find because its limited publication, and assist them keep up with current law for better serves their clients.

The study augments the current empirically based knowledge on serendipity and provides insights into legal information chance encounters among a little-studied group of knowledge workers: family law advocates.

The purpose of this study is to examine the legal framework for court-annexed dispute resolution in courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria, Malaysia and Singapore. The major part of the study is dedicated to propose reforms in the administration of justice system in the courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria and the relevance of such reforms to the ongoing reforms in the Middle East and North African (MENA) countries.

This is an integrative literature review, which adopts a comparative approach in analyzing the conceptual framework of amicable dispute resolution in the modern world with particular reference to the Sharī‘ah court.

The findings of this research illustrate the adaptability of the practices in Malaysia and Singapore in the courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria and the MENA region.

An exposition of the dispute resolution processes in Islamic law reveals the relevance of these processes in modern reforms of the administration of justice system. The practical implications of this study include the streamlining of the rules and procedures of modern Sharī‘ah courts in post-revolution Arab countries to allow for court-annexed amicable (alternative) dispute resolution initiatives.

As far as it is known, this is the first conceptual study on the court-annexed dispute resolution frameworks of Sharī‘ah courts in three commonwealth jurisdictions.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

The object of this research is the reconstruction of the existing legal response by European Union states to the phenomenon of immigration. It seeks to analyse the process of conferral of protection.

One main dimension is selected and discussed: the case law of the national courts. The study focuses on the legal status of immigrants resulting from the intervention of these national courts.

The research shows that although the courts have conferred an increasing protection on immigrants, this has not challenged the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of the states to decide, according to their discretionary prerogatives, which immigrants are allowed to enter and stay in their territories. Notwithstanding the differences in the general constitutional and legal structures, the research also shows that the courts of the three countries considered – France, Germany and Spain – have progressively moved towards converging solutions in protecting immigrants.

The research contributes to a better understanding of the different legal orders analysed.

The aim of this paper is to analyze the role of the judiciary in ensuring legal accountability of government officials and its impact on governance in the context of Bangladesh. Although, the judicial system of Bangladesh comprises Supreme Court, subordinate courts and tribunals. However, this study focuses Supreme Court only to keep the study in a manageable extent.

The study is qualitative in nature and based on content analysis. Dhaka Law Report (DLR), which is a monthly published report on case laws[1] decided by the Supreme Court has been selected as content for this study. Some case laws selected from DLR (2004‐2008) were analyzed using purposive sampling method, with a view to evaluating the effectiveness of judiciary (as an external but formal mechanism of accountability) in accountability of government administration and management and its impact on overall governance.

The most important finding of this paper is that the judiciary is very effective for ensuring legal accountability of government officials, which ultimately contributes to human rights and good governance. However, a major problem found was that until and unless an affected person files a case against a government authority, maintaining the required procedures of judiciary, it (the judiciary) has no scope to settle any disputes. Though there is a provision of Suo Muto (by own initiative) rule of the Supreme Court, this practice is very rare in Bangladesh. Furthermore, the executive is responsible for implementing the verdict of the judiciary. Therefore, if the government has not enough respect for, or does not care to implement judiciary's verdict, justice and rule of law will not be ensured. This study also found some cases like this.

This work does not address detailed issues of governance and is not based on empirical data.

This is a mixed study of judiciary and public administration, which is very rare in Bangladesh. Therefore, it will be brought into line with current practice by the concerned researchers and policy makers in public administration and judiciary.

This paper will be of interest to legal practitioners, policy makers, academicians and those in the field of governance.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

In several recent judgments, the Jordanian Court of Cassation has found that using arbitration to resolve individual labor disputes is null. The aforementioned approach which constituted a departure from the well-established former approach that the same court has followed has been confirmed by the new amendments that the Jordanian Arbitration Act has seen in 2018. In view of this, this study aims to highlight and critically analyze the above-mentioned court’s decisions and the new amendments pertaining to arbitration clauses from a Jordanian Labor Law perspective and the distinct characteristics rooted in it to find out the extent to which applying arbitration in such a context is acceptable or not.

To examine how effective are the approaches followed by the Jordanian courts and the legislator in ruling the unacceptability of arbitration clauses in individual labor contracts and to observe to what extent it has been successful in this relation, this work makes use of the secondary data available in this regard as the main method to complete such an examination and this includes the relevant different legislations, court’s decisions and jurisprudence. By critically analyzing and comparing the various data contained in these secondary data sources, this work will identify the problems associated with such approaches and accordingly bring up different recommendations and conclusions.

While the current author do largely agree with the conclusions that have been reached recently by the aforementioned courts, it is submitted that these courts and the legislator have not dealt with such a matter in an adequate and comprehensive manner as they should have spilled more ink on this area of law. Furthermore, this work argues that while the principles that necessitate arbitration shall be respected, the distinct characteristics of the labor law warrant a more careful approach than actually followed by the competent authorities.

Taking into consideration the recent different approaches followed by the Jordanian courts and legislator in ruling the unacceptability of arbitration clauses in individual labor contracts, it would not be a surprise to say that there is no comprehensive and updated scholarly work which has either examined such different approaches or addressed its implications. Accordingly, this work derives its originality and value from being the first and most updated work that examines and addresses such a thorny matter.

Outlines the present system of labour and social disputes settlement in Slovenia. Looks at the construction of the courts, precedural aspects and the areas which they govern. Provides some suggestions for improvement and change. Considers alternative methods of dispute settlement and the impact of the European convention on Human Rights.