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 purpose of this paper is to consider the impact on rent review clauses of a recent UK Supreme Court ruling on the interpretation and application of contractual provisions. Although the ruling in Arnold v. Britton (2015) UKSC 36 concerned service charge provisions, the court’s approach has significant implications for rent reviews where a fixed or indexed increase is intended.

Review of the Supreme Court’s approach and findings in a case concerning clauses that provided for fixed percentage increases in long leases.

It is no part of the court’s function, through the process of contractual interpretation, to rescue a party from a bad bargain.

Supreme Court ruling in Arnold v. Britton was considered in the context of recent rulings on rent review clauses.

When drafting for a fixed or stepped increase at rent review, parties must ensure that any formulae or other provisions governing calculation produce results that are fair and in line with the parties’ actual intentions. The court will not use the process of contractual interpretation to rescue a party from a bad bargain, and will not intervene to override clear wording. Although the court has power to decide in favour of commercial common sense where a clause is ambiguous or unclear, there is a limit to the “red ink” that the court can apply, and no room for remedial interpretation where a clause is clear.

Where contract provisions are clear it is not open to the court to intervene, by means of contractual interpretation, to protect or to rescue a party who has been disadvantaged, however seriously, if the clause is clear. Where such cases arise in a contract covered by English law, or in similar common law jurisdictions, any protection must be found in statute.

Practitioner’s review and comments on recent Supreme Court authority.

This article gives an account of the cases in which the Children Act 1989 has been interpreted and applied by the highest courts in the UK, the appellate committee of the House of Lords until October 2009 when their jurisdiction was taken over by the new Supreme Court of the UK. It explains the reasoning behind those decisions and how they did, or did not, reflect the thinking of the original framers of the Act. It concludes that, by and large, the Act has stood up well to judicial scrutiny but that the Human Rights Act 1998 has brought new challenges to which it must respond.

Throughout the history of commerce, individuals have searched for informational advantages that will lead to their enrichment. In a time of global capital markets, 24 hours a day trading opportunities, and a professional services corps of market experts, informational advantages are pursued by virtually every market participant. This paper examines one of the most vilified informational advantages in modern capital markets: insider trading. In the USA during the 1980s, insider trading scandals occupied the front pages of not only the trade papers, but also quotidian tabloids. Assailed for its unfairness and characterised by some as thievery, insider trading incidents increased calls for stricter regulation of the marketplace and its participants. In the aftermath of the spectacular insider trading litigation in the USA in the late 1980s, many foreign states began to re‐evaluate the effectiveness of their own regulatory structures. In large part, this reassessment was not the produce of domestic demand, but constituted a response to American agitation for increased regulation of insider trading.

This chapter provides an overview of local government auditing in Brazil. The mandate of regional Courts of Accounts, which are public audit organisations, includes overseeing states and municipalities’ legal compliance and public policy performance, while the federal Supreme Audit Institution scrutinises fiscal transfers from the central to local governments. Each of the 32 regional Courts of Accounts is autonomous. However, all follow the Napoleonic audit model and are internally organised in three main functions: auditing (comprising investigation, fair hearing and adversarial phase, and accusation), prosecuting (comprising legal compliance analysis), and judgmental. Despite the comprehensive legal mandate and recent digitalisation efforts, Courts still focus on compliance audit. Due to their autonomy, the Courts lack central coordination, standardised audit techniques, and uniform procedural rules. Moreover, the Courts’ lack of independence and transparency may impair their capacity to promote democratic accountability.

Employment law recognised the value of whistleblowing with the enactment of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, protecting a ‘worker’ against dismissal and victimisation. Whistleblowers are particularly vulnerable in the gig economy as they may fall outside the statutory definition of ‘worker’ for the purposes of the whistleblowing legislation. This makes a study of whistleblowing in the gig economy pertinent. This chapter explores the statutory definition of ‘worker’ with regard to the current whistleblowing provisions and considers the barriers it presents for gig workers. Judicial interpretation of the definition is examined through an analysis of recent case law that shows much inconsistency and a conflict of judicial approach. The resulting blurred boundaries of the legal term leave a gig worker uncertain as to the level of their protection for blowing the whistle. The need for reform to protect individuals in a wide range of working relationships is clear. It is argued that the new EU Whistleblowing Directive, in protecting ‘work-related activity’, provides better protection for all whistleblowers. The role of human rights in extending the status of work is also advanced. Finally, the implications of developments in this area for key stakeholders in the gig economy are considered highlighting the importance of creative new approaches to give voice to all workers.

Institutional arrangements, while constituting subject positions, also relegate others to inhabit unlivable abject positions. Such a perspective on identity begs the question on the possibilities of institutional reform given that abjects must seek recourse, if any, from the very institutions that marginalized them. One source for reform can be found in the functioning of institutional forums vested with performative powers, such as the Supreme Court. But how do these institutional forums legitimately bring about social transformation given that precedents bind them? To address this puzzle, we analyzed two Supreme Court rulings that showcase the performativity of institutions in materializing subject/abject positions, and the reforms that are possible. One is the 2015 US Supreme Court ruling providing marriage rights to same-sex couples. The other is the 2014 Indian Supreme Court ruling that legalized a third gender. An analysis of these two rulings and a comparison across them highlights the historical yet contingent nature of identity. The analysis also highlights “citational grafting” as a key mechanism underlying institutional reform, i.e., citations to earlier instances of social transformation serving as precedents for bringing about additional changes given new circumstances.

The prominence of the best interests principle in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 represented an important transition to a more resolutely patient-centred model regarding decision-making for incapable adults (“P”). This paper aims to examine the courts’ consideration of P’s values, wishes and beliefs in the context of medical treatment, reflect on whether this has resulted in a wide interpretation of the best interests standard and consider how this impacts clinical decision makers.

A particular focus will be on case law from the Court of Protection of England and Wales and the Supreme Court of the UK. Cases have been selected for discussion on the basis of the significance of their judgements for the field, the range of issues they illustrate and the extent of commentary and attention they have received in the literature. They are presented as a narrative review and are non-exhaustive.

With respect to values, wishes and beliefs, the best interests standard’s interpretation in the courts has been widely varied. Opposing tensions and thematic conflicts have emerged from this case law and were analysed from the perspective of the clinical decision maker.

This review illustrates the complexity and gravity of decisions of the clinical decision makers and the courts have considered in the context of best interests determinations for incapacitated adults undergoing medical treatment. Subsequent to the first such case before the Supreme Court of the UK, emerging case law trends relating to capacity legislation are considered.

Examines the legal environment of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA with respect to auditor liability. Provides an understanding of the legal risks to accountants associated with third‐party uses of audited financial statements by contrasting accounting liability for negligent misrepresentation in various US settings with those of the four other nations. Liability pressure has been very acute and litigation in the five countries has increased. Evidence supports a trend towards limiting third‐party liability to accountants.