Search results

The principle of offshore financial confidentiality is a controversial issue in offshore law. On the one hand, offshore jurisdictions view confidentiality in financial matters as an essential ingredient in the offshore industry which deserves to be protected. On the other, onshore states are increasingly hostile to confidentiality and have been willing to take drastic measures to undermine it.

In recent years, traditional legal systems have been increasingly challenged by the rapid and wide-ranging changes induced by modern technology and science which constantly transform our economies and societies. The rise of a new type of scholarship in contemporary legal thought can be understood in the light of the growing disjunction between the traditional methods of law dealing with social problems and the overall pragmatic spirit of the globalized economies. The intrinsic conservatism of traditional law is sometimes (more or less explicitly) accused of being inadequate to cope with the problems raised by the application of new technologies and sciences, or worse, of being an impediment to the development of the full potential of the modern economies.

The auditing and accounting profession must provide appropriate disclosure of the going concern status of an entity, especially when that status is threatened. Auditors have an obligation to consider the wider legal environment of an entity, including all relevant case law, when they perform any such audit. Despite this obligation, the auditing profession appears to violate important legal principles. The auditor’s approach to the going concern status of an entity is contained in the South African Auditing Standard, SAAS 570 “Going Concern”. The South African legal framework’s approach to this issue emerges from the Supreme Court case Philotex (Pty) Ltd v Snyman. This article explores the fundamental disagreement between the auditor’s approach to the going concern problem and that adopted in terms of the wider South African legal framework.

The applicable jurisdiction for insolvency proceedings, as provided by the Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings, is the court of the Member State where the debtor's center of main interest (COMI) is located (Article 3(1)). The Regulation, however, does not provide a comprehensive definition of the COMI. This paper seeks to explore the meaning and developments behind the meaning of COMI as influenced by judicial reasoning and conflicts across Member States.

The study centres around the emerging jurisprudence and analyses case law across Member States in order to draw conclusions on the meaning of COMI and the emerging concepts. Extensive consideration of statutory interpretation, case reports and judicial comment is present in order to inform and develop conclusions.

In the absence of a definition it appears that the only relevant European guidance emerges from recital 13 and Article 3 (1). With little guidance in the Regulation, it has therefore been left to national courts to decide how the notion of COMI should be interpreted. Determining the COMI has emerged as one of the most controversial aspect and the principle point of legal conflict, with some highly debated cases within member states’ courts. On the basis of the case law, it is suggested that the interpretation of COMI is more flexible in UK and Italian courts. The approach adopted in continental Europe is referred to as the “centre of operations approach”, i.e. the debtor's COMI has to be determined by the place where he is “ascertainable by third parties”. The Anglo Saxon approach, on the other hand, is known as the “mind of management approach”, i.e. the debtor's COMI must be situated where decisions are actually made. The latter seems to enjoy a more practical and accessible approach.

Not only will the findings assist those seeking to understand the process and COMI requirements across member states but it will also assist those researchers seeking to understanding the comparative and conflict of law barriers to pan‐European insolvency proceedings.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the Agency Theory in order to understand the true nature of the corporation by determining the respective roles of shareholders and directors/managers within a corporation.

The paper compares the economists' depiction of the firm with the legal conception of the corporation. It then analyses the legal concept of ownership and proves that the shareholders are the owners of their shares only and not of the corporation which is a separate legal person. The theories of corporation and relevant case law are also analysed.

The analysis reveals that currently there are two distinct models of the corporation. The economists view a firm in terms of a nexus of contracts like a partnership where shareholders are the owners of the firm and the directors/managers are their agents. The law, on the other hand, regards the corporation as a separate legal entity with rights and liabilities of a natural person that is not subject to ownership. This doctrine of legal personality is the grund norm of corporate law from which other principles like limited liability, perpetual succession, transferability of shares and independent board are derived. However, both economic and legal models converge upon the purpose of corporation i.e. maximization of shareholders value.

The paper highlights the distinction between economic and legal models of the firm. It points out that from a legal perspective, neither the shareholders are the principals nor the managers are their agents as proposed by the Agency Theory. The economists assume conflict of interests between the shareholders and directors and devise mechanisms to reduce agency costs. Law, on the other hand, determines manifestly the rights and liabilities of each participant in corporate structure. The directors owe their duties to the corporation and manage it without interference from the shareholders. Such arrangement is a product of historical process and qualifies a corporation as a sui generis form of business organization.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the existing body of work in the area of Islamic banking by investigating the regulatory accommodation process of Islamic banking in Italy.

The method used is essentially based upon an analysis of laws, regulations and jurisprudence/legal doctrine.

In Italy, where Muslim represent, from a religious point of view, the second largest immigrant community, no Shari’a-compliant institution has been authorised yet, but no legal obstacle is laid down.

The paper examines the accommodation process of Shari’a-compliant banking within the Italian system of banking and business law. Therefore, the paper is mainly based on the Italian jurisprudence/legal doctrine. Moreover, no comprehensive analysis of Islamic banking principles is provided.

The paper, investigating the accommodation process of Islamic banking in the Italian banking system, shows any legal and regulatory obstacles refraining Muslims living in Italy from living according to Islam and complying with the general regulation of undertakings.

Examination of the topic is originally undertaken because the investigation of Islamic banking in the Italian legal framework matches the business-based approach with the cultural-based approach as complementary analyses.

Comprehensive basis to measure civil servants’ neutrality in the effectuation of concurrent regional head elections, valid basis to determine the most appropriate strategy to enhance civil servants’ neutrality in the governance.

This research is a normative or doctrinal research. Secondary data are retrieved from the literature in the forms of legal documents and regulations concerning civil servants’ role in general elections. In this research, two products of law were analyzed as follows: first, the one related to the urgency of civil servants’ neutrality in regional head election and second, the one related to the synchronization of legal norms about civil servants’ neutrality during regional head elections. Data analysis was done using a juridical qualitative analysis model.

The urgency of neutrality is real in the implementation of concurrent regional head elections due to 3 reasons as follows: Historically, state civil apparatus neutrality and regulations. There is a synchronization of the neutrality of the civil state apparatus in the legislation concerning civil state apparatus with the laws and regulations concerning the implementation of concurrent regional head elections including the following: Act Number 5 of 2014, Act Number 10 of 2016 and Act Number 8 of 2012.

The study investigated the neutrality of civil servants during the concurrent regional head election in Indonesia. The objectives of this research were investigating, comprehending and analyzing the urgency of civil servants’ neutrality in regional head election, and describing and analyzing the synchronization of civil servants’ neutrality based on the laws related to civil servants and laws related to the effectuation of concurrent regional head election.

The paper aims to examine whether the panel and parties of China – Intellectual Property Rights could have applied the general principle of necessity developed under Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. This paper specifically seeks to examine applicability of the general principle of necessity in the World Trade Organization (WTO) tribunal's analysis of the provisions of the Berne Convention, which is incorporated by Article 9 of the Trade‐related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.

The paper performs a series of documentary/archival research and case studies of the jurisprudence and interpretative methods of the WTO adjudicative bodies.

The general principle of necessity in WTO jurisprudence is applicable when a measure taken by a WTO member is inconsistent with WTO provisions, the measure is highly relevant to the sovereignty of the WTO member, the WTO member seeks to justify the measure by applying one of the exceptions articulated in the WTO Agreements, and the relevant language of necessity exists in the exception provisions. If these requirements are met, the general principle of necessity would be applicable to other provision of WTO Agreements, including Article 17 of the Berne Convention incorporated by Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement, provided that the parties of the dispute raise the defense in their arguments.

By examining the application of the general principle of necessity and its relevance to sovereignty in one of the most recent disputes in the WTO, this paper analyzes a decision that could have considerable impacts on the jurisprudence of future disputes regarding enforcement of intellectual property rights in the WTO regime.

In propelling Malaysia to become a high value-added and high-income economy by 2020, the Central Bank of Malaysia has consistently emphasized the need for a new trajectory of transformation and growth which will leverage on a robust legal framework that for enhancing Islamic financial transactions. This paper aims to examine the latest major policy initiatives and legal reforms introduced to promote both local and cross-border transactions that seek to project Malaysia as a hub for Islamic financial transactions.

While adopting an analytical approach in analysing the relevant issues, the study relies on doctrinal legal method in highlighting major reforms introduced to enhance the legal and regulatory framework of Islamic finance.

The study finds that the importance of law reforms in strengthening the financial system cannot be overemphasized, particularly when it comes to the need for an end-to-end Sharīʿah compliance framework and consumer protection.

Other emerging jurisdictions aspiring to adopt Islamic finance products can learn from the Malaysia’s pioneering role in introducing an effective legal and regulatory framework.

Though there are a number of studies on Malaysia’s leading role in the law and regulation of Islamic finance, this study is one of the earliest attempts to explore the role of the Central Bank of Malaysia in enhancing the legal framework for Islamic financial transactions through the introduction of the Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 and other relevant policy regulations.

Company law harmonisation is considered to be necessary for the achievement of the European Union's (EU) aim of a single market and the free movement of goods and services throughout member states. This paper aims to contribute to understanding of both business and accounting history by considering whether UK legal history can offer any insight into the process of harmonisation. First, approaches to company law in the United Kingdom and the remainder of the EU are outlined in order to identify key differences and to explain why harmonisation is desired. Secondly, the UK position is considered and historical attempts to lessen legal differences between Scots and English mercantile laws are then examined, focusing on harmonisation attempts. Finally, by reflecting on the UK experience, implications for the EU company law harmonisation programme are drawn.