Search results

As a rule, common courts are hermetic organizations, separated from their stakeholders by procedures based on legal provisions. For these reasons, they are often perceived as unreliable and non-transparent, and as such, they do not inspire trust among stakeholders. The authors posit that the court’s community involvement may lead to the increased accountability and legitimacy of courts, which should in turn result in jurisprudence benefits. This paper discusses the concept of community involvement of courts, demonstrates how this idea may be implemented and explains its benefits for courts.

The results of an action research study undertaken between June 2013 and March 2018 at the Regional Court in Gdansk (Poland) are discussed.

The results highlight factors underlying the implementation of the idea of community involvement, as well as the areas in which courts take these actions, and explain how it influences their accountability and legitimacy. This research describes the interests of different stakeholders and proposes a range of actions that may be taken by courts while cooperating with stakeholders to achieve the aims of community involvement. It also proposes a set of steps that enable courts to implement the idea of community involvement.

This paper develops the idea of the community involvement of courts, which may be used as an operating rule for public institutions to increase their legitimacy and accountability and explain its introduction in the context of courts. It offers a universal framework for the community involvement of courts that can be used in the context of any court in both the continental and Anglo-Saxon systems.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse whether title to land is secure in England and Wales when registered under the Land Registration Act (LRA) 2002, in particular when a title is registered, where there has been a mistake and how that connects with the doctrine of overreaching.

This paper analyses the reported judgments, with particular emphasis on the decision in Knight v Fernley (2021).

This paper explores the concepts of “mistake” and “overreaching” and concludes that LRA 2002 provides a complex, but complete answer to concerns about the application of these doctrines.

This paper will encourage certainty in the judicial decision-making process when “mistakes” occur in the land register. It will contribute to the resolution of difficult, and current, controversies.

To enable legal advisers to be clear in their obligations and the advice they give to clients, and to further a better understanding of title registration in England and Wales.

The LRA 2002 replaces registration of title with title by registration. The real force of this is only now being realised and there are few reported judgments, and less consistency, working out what this means in practice. There are no other comments on this critical case, even though it helps elucidate the circumstances in which the title register may be altered.

The corporate communications literature recently focused on corporate board gender diversity, specifically looking at two central aspects: gender quotas and equitable target percentages for women on corporate boards. This paper extends the debate by focusing on board gender diversity and critical mass theory.

The paper gives a conceptual viewpoint on the issues raised in the literature on board gender diversity through a critical mass theory lens.

Following the 2022 European Union (EU) directive, all EU member states will have to attain a 40% women representation on large corporate boards to achieve board gender diversity and what has been termed a “critical mass”. However, the literature indicates that gender diversity benefits may not be achieved if a critical mass is not composed of independent women directors who create a voice that produces a collective action. The authors highlight why a critical mass may not be achieved. The inconsistency in prior research linking corporate board gender diversity to economic performance may result from the critical mass of women directors not reflecting an independent collective action. However, as gender-diverse boards evolve, the authors argue that women will not just be seen as female directors but will be accepted on equal terms with their male counterparts and have an equal voice; gender will no longer be an issue and critical mass theory may then become irrelevant.

From a corporate communications perspective, this study will focus the minds of human resources (HR) professionals on the importance of the composition of women on corporate boards if the HR professionals wish to obtain the full potential benefits of board gender diversity. Theoretically, this study highlights the importance of critical mass and collective action when researching the economic benefits of corporate board gender diversity. Investment analysts may wish to look more closely at the structure of corporate boards and not just the numbers.

This paper gives a conceptual viewpoint on the critical mass theory and corporate board gender diversity, identifying that it is not just the numbers that are important but also the issue of minority independence and collective action, and this is, therefore, unique in this respect. Future research should identify if a critical mass (not just numbers) of women on corporate boards has been achieved. Only then that the linkage, based on critical mass theory, between board gender diversity and corporate performance/profitability can be made. Knowing whether board sizes are being increased to accommodate the added female directors would be also interesting, or will the new female directors replace existing male directors? However, the most important research question, once gender diversity has been achieved, could be: Is critical mass theory relevant with respect to board gender diversity?

Digital transformation affected modern society influencing how businesses cooperate and produce value. In this context, Artificial Intelligence plays a critical role. This study aims to explore the role of Artificial Intelligence in organisational positioning within the market, influencing firms' competitiveness. In this vein, this research seeks to respond to the following research question: How does AI impact the competitive advantage of healthcare organizations?.

To tackle the research question, an explorative analysis using the case study method to investigate an international healthcare center in Dubai was conducted. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with the head and the members of the robotic surgery team in CMC Dubai to thoroughly understand what the components of the robotic approach are and how the arrangement before the introduction of this innovative technique while shedding light on the added value and the advantages of adopting such technique on both patient safety and patient satisfaction. Additionally, archival data and online documentation (e.g. industry reports, newspaper articles and internal documents) were analyzed to obtain data triangulation.

The results highlight three primary outcomes influenced by implementing AI in organizational processes: clinical, financial and technological outcomes. The study will offer interesting non-studied insights about the implementation of Artificial Intelligence tools in the healthcare sector and specifically robotic surgeries, and to which extent this will contribute and represent a competitive advantage. Results will hopefully insert a brick in the wall of the impact of AI tools on the quality and the results of surgical operations while emphasizing the benefits of integrating AI in surgical practice.

This study offers interesting theoretical and practical implications. It opens a new perspective to understand and manage AI tools in service. This research is not without limits providing valuable insights for future research.