Search results

The aim of the present study is to shed light on the role of legal practitioners, namely, lawyers and notaries, in the fight against money laundering: Are they considered as facilitators or obstacles against money laundering? How does the global and the EU legal framework deal with the legal professionals?

The research follows a deductive approach attempting to respond to questions such as: How do the lawyers’ and notaries’ societies react in front of the anti-money laundering measures that concern them and why? What are the discrepancies between the lawyers’ professional secrecy and the obligations that EU anti-money laundering legislation assigns them?

This study disclosures the response of the European union and international legal and regulatory framework as well as the reflexes of the international and European legal professionals’ associations to this danger. It also demonstrates the reaction of lawyers against European union anti-money laundering legislation, to the point that it limits not only the confidentiality principle but also the position of the European judicial systems to the contradiction between this principle and the lawyers’ obligation to report their suspicions to the authorities.

To fulfil the study goals, it was necessary to overcome some obstacles, like the limitation of existing sources. Indeed, transnational empirical research considering the professionals who facilitate money laundering is narrow. Besides, policymakers and academics only recently expressed more interest in money laundering and its facilitators.

This paper fulfils an identified need to study the legal professionals’ role not only in money laundering practices but also in anti-money laundering policies.

Neuroscientific research on addictions has prompted a paradigm shift from a moral to a medical understanding – with substantial implications for legal professionals’ interactions with and decision-making surrounding individuals with addiction. This study complements prior work on US defense attorney’s understandings of addiction by investigating two further perspectives: the potential “next generation” of legal professionals in the USA (criminal justice undergraduates) and legal professionals from another system (Germany). This paper aims to assess their views on the brain disease model of addiction, dominance and relevance of this model, the responsibility of affected persons and preferred sources of information.

Views of 74 US criminal justice undergraduate students and 74 German legal professionals were assessed using Likert scales and open-ended questions in an online survey.

Neuroscientific research findings on addictions and views that addiction is a brain disease were rated as significantly more relevant by American students to their potential future work than by German legal professionals. However, a majority of both samples agreed that addiction is a brain disease and that those affected are responsible for their condition and actions. Sources of information most frequently used by both groups were publications in legal academic journals.

In the USA, information for legal professionals needs to be expanded and integrated into the education of its “next generation,” while in Germany it needs to be developed and promoted. Legal academic journals appear to play a primary role in the transfer of research on addiction into legal practice.

This study complements prior work on US defense attorney’s understandings of addiction by investigating two further perspectives.

This study is carried out to evaluate how well legal knowledge can be demonstrated by a built environment professional via the scenario-based approach to the learning of law modules.

A Delphi analysis of the advice provided by an MSC quantity surveying student, on a scenario-based legal problem arising due to a property contract, is carried out. The tendered legal advice was submitted as part of the assessment requirements for an MSc law module, following the university criteria, after the teaching of a law module. The student report, which attained an A-grade, and the assessment criteria used for marking/grading by the university were subsequently sent to 18 practicing lawyers, who were selected to constitute an expert panel, to independently judge the extent of legal knowledge demonstrated in the student report.

The Delphi analysis outcome showed that the expert panel holds a similar consensus view to the university on the level of legal knowledge demonstrated and by extension the effectiveness of the law module in imparting legal knowledge to a non-lawyer. The study outcome shows how well legal knowledge can be acquired and applied by a non-lawyer, within the context of the built environment, via scenario-based teaching of a law module.

This study serves as a preliminary step necessary to arouse further research toward empirically profiling the current outlook of a wider range of graduating students receiving scenario-based legal education in the built environment.

This study aims to use institutional and upper echelons theories to comprehensively investigate the intricate interplay between TMT legal expertise and firms' adaptive strategies in legal contexts, notably within emerging economies. It explores how upper echelons experiences shape opportunistic compliance strategies, impacting value and risk perceptions. Drawing on upper echelons theory, the research probes how TMT legal expertise molds firms’ involvement in significant lawsuits, accounting for influential roles. It scrutinizes TMT’s impact on legal strategies, positing that managerial discretion emerges from environmental factors, organizational attributes and executive traits. The study underscores TMT’s internal incentives and external factors’ interplay, molding strategic legal engagement.

To validate this framework, statistical analysis is performed on data from 2,584 Chinese-listed firms. The data set spans 2010–2015, with 5,713 material lawsuits. Chosen due to reliable institutional-level incentives data from the China Market Index Database, years 2016–2019 are excluded for methodological disparities. Moreover, 2007–2009 is omitted to mitigate the potential financial crisis impact. This study’s 11,272 observations ensure robust empirical exploration, offering insights into the interplay of TMT legal expertise, institutional factors and firms’ legal strategies.

The study reveals that firms led by executives with legal expertise are more prone to engage in significant lawsuits, indicating strategic use of legal skills. TMT age moderates this, with older teams less likely to engage. TMT tenure’s effect remains unclear due to tenure-risk preference complexity. Institutional factors matter; less legally mature regions reduce managers’ legal risk intention. Results confirm hypotheses and highlight executive human capital’s impact on firms’ legal strategies.

This study acknowledges contributions while highlighting limitations, including the need for detailed distinctions in lawsuit roles and exploration of heterogeneous TMT power dynamics. Further research is proposed for nuanced power dynamics and comprehensive TMT legal background data. The study advances upper echelons theory by introducing TMT legal expertise as a factor influencing strategic lawsuit behavior. It challenges institutional theory by showing the adaptable legal context, beyond fixed constraints. Moderating factors – group risk attitude and external knowledge – deepen understanding of upper echelons’ impact. Enhanced data collection is encouraged to address limitations and refine findings.

This study’s implications extend to managerial practices. Firms should acknowledge the dynamic legal system, using TMT legal expertise for strategic legal challenges. Executives should pragmatically approach regulations. While legal professionals enhance compliance, caution is needed in selecting TMT members with legal expertise due to the risk of misusing it for unnecessary litigation, potentially misaligned with financial performance goals.

This study combines institutional and upper echelons theories to explore TMT legal expertise’s impact on firms’ adaptive strategies in emerging economies. It challenges the idea of a universally constraining legal environment and highlights how TMT legal expertise enhances firms’ management of complex legal risks. The research introduces TMT legal expertise as an influencing factor in strategic lawsuits, revealing nuanced relationships between legal contexts and strategic decisions. The findings enrich upper echelons theory, challenge conventional institutional views and identify moderating factors that deepen the understanding of upper echelons’ influence in legal landscapes.

The paper enriches the understanding of the principal challenges faced in future lawyers' education in Mexico considering global trends, particularly from the perspective of skills creation in diverse areas of legal practice.

The framework used draws on trends identified within an international collaborative research study in which both authors participated, titled “Developing a Blueprint for Global Legal Education”. This current paper stems from the premise that these recommendations can be further developed and better utilised if explored within a specific context. The methodology designed for this research consisted of two main components: a thorough analysis of the norms that regulate the education system and the professional practice in Mexico, and an extensive literature review that provided insights into the state of global trends in legal education.

This paper reveals that in Mexico having a well-designed and comprehensive legal framework is the first step to promote the creation of high-quality educational models.

The study analyses the current situation in Mexico within four global trends: (1) regulation of legal education and access to the profession; (2) building professional practice skills; (3) internationalisation of education and (4) incorporation of technology and responsible innovation.

The reflections are intended to promote better training of law students in the skills required to face the various challenges that the legal profession currently involves. This is under an approach that analyses global challenges and identifies the best practices to connect learning processes with in-demand professional skills.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an extensive examination and analysis of the current literature on the use of blockchain technology in courts. The paper aims to explore the potential benefits of implementing blockchain technology in courts, such as increasing transparency and accountability, improving the efficiency of court procedures and enhancing the security of court records. Additionally, the paper intends to identify the challenges and limitations of using blockchain technology in courts and propose potential solutions to overcome these obstacles. The ultimate goal is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the potential applications and implications of blockchain technology in the context of the court system.

The research design of this study is qualitative, involving a thorough examination and analysis of existing literature on the use of blockchain technology in courts. The data collection procedure involves gathering information from various sources, such as academic publications, official reports and other relevant records. Data analysis is conducted using a thematic analysis approach, which identifies and categorizes recurring themes that emerge from the data. This approach ensures that the results are credible, dependable and accurate representations of the experiences of the participants. By using these methodologies, the study is able to draw meaningful conclusions and insights into the use of blockchain technology in courts.

The major findings of this paper suggest that the implementation of blockchain technology in courts has the potential to bring significant benefits such as increased transparency, efficiency and security. The use of blockchain technology in courts can enable the creation of tamper-proof records that are immutable, secure and transparent, which can help prevent fraud, reduce costs and enhance trust in the judicial system. However, adopting this technology also poses challenges and limitations, such as interoperability, governance and scalability. Overall, the paper concludes that while there are challenges to be addressed, the benefits of blockchain technology in courts are significant and should be explored further.

The study has several limitations that need to be taken into account. Firstly, the availability of data on blockchain implementation in the court system is limited, making it challenging to provide a comprehensive analysis of the topic. Thus, the study’s findings may not be generalizable to other contexts. Secondly, the study takes a technology-centric approach and does not consider blockchain technology’s social and legal implications in court operations. Thirdly, the case studies presented in this paper are limited to a few countries. Moreover, the implementation of blockchain technology in the court system is still in its early stages and lacks standardization, technical expertise and regulatory frameworks. Lastly, uncertainty around the legal framework may hinder its widespread adoption and use.

The practical implications of this study suggest that the use of blockchain technology in courts has the potential to improve efficiency, security, transparency and accountability in the court system. It can reduce the risk of data tampering, expedite case resolution and lower the cost of legal proceedings. Therefore, this study provides a framework for courts to consider blockchain technology’s potential benefits and explore its future adoption.

The social implications of this study are significant, as the adoption of blockchain technology in the court system can have a profound impact on society. Firstly, by increasing transparency and accountability, blockchain technology can promote public trust in the court system and improve access to justice, particularly for disadvantaged communities (Liu et al., 2020). Secondly, blockchain technology can reduce the reliance on intermediaries, such as lawyers, and streamline the case management process, making legal services more accessible and affordable for the general public (Khurana, 2020). Finally, the use of blockchain technology can create a more secure and efficient court system, enhancing the overall effectiveness of the judicial system and promoting public confidence.

This study provides an original contribution to the literature by exploring the use of blockchain technology in courts from a qualitative research design perspective. While there are a growing number of studies on the potential applications of blockchain technology in various fields, this study provides a comprehensive examination of the current literature on the use of blockchain in courts, identifying the benefits and limitations of its implementation. The study’s focus on the strengths and limitations of blockchain technology and its implications in court adds to the originality of this research.

Deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) are the tool of choice for federal prosecutors when adjudicating corporate misconduct. A DPA is a negotiation that permits the allegedly guilty party from undergoing a criminal trial if they avoid committing further wrongdoing for a specified period. This paper aims to examine whether DPAs are a beneficial mechanism for the criminal justice system to use while adjudicating corporate misconduct. By conducting in-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews with 24 practitioners in the legal field and white-collar crime experts, this study identifies the shortcomings and advantages of DPAs and highlights what policy enactments might enhance their application. The study contributes to the existing literature by expanding the narratives used by judicial officials, legal practitioners and white-collar crime scholars on the role of DPAs.

The current study is an in-depth qualitative analysis that explores judicial actors’ and white-collar crime scholars’ opinions on the adoption of DPAs to adjudicate corporate misconduct. The literature on DPAs is currently derived primarily from law and literature reviews published by legal scholars. Clandestine negotiations are not accessible to the public and are frequently kept in sealed files unless a breach of contract occurs, resulting in the case proceeding to trial. Hence, a qualitative analysis is the best approach to evaluate the effectiveness of DPAs. Further, little evidence is available that focuses on the opinions of professionals who have participated in these agreements. The interviews were conducted over Zoom and lasted an average of 43 min, with the longest interview spanning 1 h and 45 min and the shortest interview being 14 minutes. A non-probability sampling method – specifically, snowball sampling – was used to generate a total sample of 24 legal professionals and white-collar crime scholars. Initial participants were found by contacting law offices specializing in white-collar crime litigation and using current networks to attain access to a broader range of participants. Then, 19 participants provided referrals throughout the study. The final sample consisted of nine government officials, eight legal practitioners and seven white-collar crime academics experts. One of the government official interviews was excluded from the final research project due to a lack of expertise in the field of white-collar crime. The interview questions were designed to promote in-depth conversation and insight into personal opinions on the adoption of DPAs. Several inquiries highlighted whether DPAs are an appropriate response to corporate misconduct and whether they reduced recidivism through their intended deterrent effect. Furthermore, several descriptive questions sought to understand which criminal justice actors support the adoption of DPAs in white-collar crime cases and why. Coding of the data was first conducted individually by each author. The researchers then compared thematic findings that reflected consensus.

An immediate theme identifiable in the research is the intrinsic value that DPAs offer in adjudicating corporate wrongdoing. As indicated by a participant, corporate misconduct is not “black or white,” stressing the importance of prosecutors having a middle ground between criminal prosecution and the dismissal of charges. A judicial official indicated that “DPAs are another essential arrow in a prosecutor’s quiver – and something a defense attorney can bargain for” (Respondent 5). Seven government officials and legal practitioners noted that you are unable to send a corporation to jail, and you do not simply want to put them out of business; thus, a DPA is the only tool in which the government can mandate structural change in a company without dismantling the entire entity. Only three academics concurred with the government officials and legal practitioners that DPAs are beneficial and offer prosecutors a vital middle ground. One academic, for example, stated that “DPAs have given U.S Attorney offices that ability to be involved for a considerable amount of time in a company's business, while simultaneously promoting change within the entity” (Respondent 14). Additionally, DPAs ensure that corporations are held criminally liable without triggering an endless cycle of collateral consequences for innocent third parties. One legal practitioner, for example, stated: “Just look at the Enron case; they charged Arthur Andersen with obstruction of justice and dismantled the entire entity they made it where the business was never going to come back. A small subset of individuals, in this case, should have been held responsible but instead, hundreds and if not thousands of people were harmed. With this in mind, DPAs are extremely important, in that it limits collateral consequences because DPAs take a more holistic view that criminal prosecution does not consider” (Respondent 21). Another respondent highlighted that “DPAs are the only tool available that can be employed to change an entire organization structurally” (Respondent 20). Ultimately, the findings suggest that there is a consensus among respondents that DPAs are an appropriate response to corporate misconduct, particularly when the agreement stipulates that a company must hire an external compliance monitor and update their current compliance system. Overall, participants emphasized that these stipulations promote a sense of corporate accountability, provide for the dismissal of guilty employees and mandate structural change. The majority of the respondents (n = 20) insisted that DPAs are advantageous, yet a subset of participants were skeptical of their use in white-collar crime prosecutions. One legal practitioner, for example, noted that “DPAs are political creatures that are awarded as political favors to the largest of corporations that our economy relies upon” (Respondent 17). Another government official confirmed this statement, indicating that “DPAs are a mere slap on the wrist for large corporations – they simply see it as doing business” (Respondent 6). Four academic participants emphasized that DPAs are typically negotiated with multi-level corporations and are not extended to the small businesses that suffer the dire consequences of criminal prosecution. One academic, for instance, stressed that “the question becomes is it fairly applied and being implemented properly. Larger companies are more likely to receive and benefit from a DPA, thus, raising the question of fairness” (Respondent 12). Another academic who was previously a government official stated: “DPAs risk abuse – there have been several instances where prosecutors have forced companies to donate money to favored charities and overstepped their powers. Sometimes DPAs also come with monitors. For example, banks typically have to pay for the auditor, and it becomes extremely intrusive, and it it not clear that they are efficient.”

Several limitations exist in this research. First, it is not a comprehensive study that is representative of the larger population, which limits generalizability. Given the contention of research on DPAs, this qualitative research contributes to the literature, and its findings are likely transferable to multiple settings in which DPAs are used. Second, DPAs are processed and drafted differently across jurisdictions; thus, comparing DPAs across state levels and among departments in the federal government would be equivalent to comparing apples to oranges. This comparison is yet another limitation to the study because criminal justice practitioners operate in both the state and federal jurisdictions. Another challenge in the current study and something that likely will be a problem for future researchers is the difficulty of gaining access to experts in an exclusive field of criminal justice, such as federal prosecutors, Department of Justice officials, federal judges and elite corporate defense attorneys. Ultimately, several obstacles arose during the study, particularly when recruiting participants to gain a large enough sample size to conduct meaningful analysis. This resulted in smaller sample size but rich, in-depth data that achieved saturation among participants.

Several policy implications are identifiable. First, it appears that DPAs are a mainstay of white-collar crime prosecution. No participants advocate for their complete removal from the prosecution process. Participants highlight that DPAs occupy an essential middle-ground between dismissal and criminal charges. Without this mechanism, prosecution would be impeded, and holding corporate criminal actors liable would increasingly become formidable. Although it appears that the system cannot function without DPAs, several respondents emphasize that we must begin to hold individuals accountable alongside corporations. Another policy implication that a minority of participants mentioned within the study involves ensuring that our compliance monitoring system operates appropriately. A majority of participants note that the overarching stipulation that promotes structural change within an organization is adopting a functioning compliance monitoring system, thus, emphasizing the importance of this process operating smoothly and ethically. The selection of an independent compliance monitor may be problematic. For example, a former government compliance monitor notes that not all monitors are experts in the field they are overseeing. A pharmaceutical expert, for example, may be attempting to regulate an automotive organization, which may present unique challenges. An agency of federal professionals dedicated to supervising specific industries such as automotive, pharmaceutical and financial would ensure that organizations are actually implementing the terms of the DPA.

Ultimately, the current research highlights the necessity of empirically studying the benefits and drawbacks of such agreements. Future research on the topic remains onerous due to the scarcity of a centralized database that contains extensive details of DPAs. The present study suggests that the verdict on DPAs is undecided, with more than half of the study's criminal justice professionals advocating for their continued and even increased use. However, about half of the participants, particularly academics, called attention to the agreements’ potential bias. The disagreement among participants is most contentious in the consideration of a DPA centralized database which would immensely aid future research and policy advancements.

This study aims to adopt a systematic review approach to examine the existing literature on law and LLMs.It involves analyzing and synthesizing relevant research papers, reports and scholarly articles that discuss the use of LLMs in the legal domain. The review encompasses various aspects, including an analysis of LLMs, legal natural language processing (NLP), model tuning techniques, data processing strategies and frameworks for addressing the challenges associated with legal question-and-answer (Q&A) systems. Additionally, the study explores potential applications and services that can benefit from the integration of LLMs in the field of intelligent justice.

This paper surveys the state-of-the-art research on law LLMs and their application in the field of intelligent justice. The study aims to identify the challenges associated with developing Q&A systems based on LLMs and explores potential directions for future research and development. The ultimate goal is to contribute to the advancement of intelligent justice by effectively leveraging LLMs.

To effectively apply a law LLM, systematic research on LLM, legal NLP and model adjustment technology is required.

This study contributes to the field of intelligent justice by providing a comprehensive review of the current state of research on law LLMs.

The purpose of the research paper is to determine the efficiency of all crimes approach, their relationship with a risk-based approach and the consequences on regulated sector professionals. And, therefore, what is meant by suspicion, how employees follow the requirements and how it affects the quality and quantity of suspicious activity reports. It also considers the economic and legal challenges the regulated sector faces while dealing with customers or clients. All in all, this paper investigates what does the anti-money laundering (AML) regime means for legal practice and how lawyers’ responsibility is affected.

As the research is being conducted through the analytical methodology, the specific topic of “regulated sector professionals and reporting suspicion of money laundering” is analyzed. It evaluates the fact that the risk-based approach followed in Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations and its adaptation in the UK with all crimes approach caused discrepancy in the judicial system and influenced regulated sector professionals negatively.

The paper points out that in spite of protective amendments in terms of jurisdictional immunity, UK legislation has caused problems for regulated sector professionals, such as the potential of breaching a client confidentiality agreement and avoiding tipping-off, thus remaining under pressure by clients and facing the risk of losing their clients or obligation to record suspicions in case of court investigation.

The question of money laundering and the FATF recommendations has had a considerable scholarship. However, the proposed study intends to precisely look at the efficiency of all crime approaches, their relationship with a risk-based approach and the consequences on regulated sector professionals. The proposed research will further determine the regulated sector’s economic and legal challenges while dealing with customers or clients. Unlike the existing scholarship, the proposed thesis will focus on what the AML regime means for legal practice and how lawyers’ responsibility is affected.

By inspecting the special connection between negligence and the causes of negligence, this study evaluates the reasonableness of negligence offenses elements from the perspectives of “modes” and “rules.” This study considers that in the core concept of negligent manslaughter in the Criminal Code of Taiwan, “business” comprises an outstretched legal element; thus, “application by analogy” or “customary laws” should be prohibited as a legal basis or when applying the criminal code because those are not allowed under nulla poena sine lege. Nulla poena sine lege must be respected to release construction professionals from material risks in their judicial rights and interests.

This study used data mining analysis with a database of 204 cases where construction professionals were involved in an accusation of gross negligence manslaughter (GNM) (N = 486) between 1995 and 2021 to explore the reasons and distribution of these cases in the construction industry in Taiwan.

The results showed that the main reasons behind lawful GNM accusations against construction professionals are as follows: (1) the violation of employers' duty of care to prevent hazards caused in workplaces where falling and collapsing are concerns during construction, thus resulting in death; (2) gross negligence during design, construction and supervision, causing damages after natural disasters such as earthquakes and typhoons.

This study discusses the whole life circle of construction, starting from planning, design, construction and completion. However, the involvement of other offenses such as providing false statements, forgery, embezzlement, unjust enrichment and fraudulent tax evasion or criminal responsibilities stipulated in the Building Act or administrative punishments are beyond the scope of this study. Future studies will focus on foreign “business GNM” cases from judicial precedents with similar backgrounds to Taiwan in the construction industry to verify whether similar conclusions can be drawn and to examine their differences.

This study applied data mining and data analysis to the data and explored potential causality and patterns of GNM cases in judicial cases. The results of the analyses can be used as evidence for potential causality and thus facilitate construction professionals' self-reflection and contribute to the sustainable development of working environments for construction.

This study agrees with the removal of GNM titled “business” in the Criminal Code of Taiwan to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the building industry. By doing so, national judicial and management systems will be in line with international standards, ensuring that everyone has equal access to justice.

Goal 16 of the SDGs by the United Nations aims to promote judicial equality, peace, justice and strong institutions. With this basis, this study collected and analyzed data in the field of criminal law and applied the theory of criminal offenses committed by negligence to real construction-related cases. This study especially discusses whether construction professionals were imposed with excessive responsibilities when a court enforced the “duty of care” that asked the professionals to bear the responsibility of results for events that should be and could be foreseen.