Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 621 artikelen

x
Artikel

Urgenda als civielrechtelijk geschil

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht, Aflevering 12 2021
Trefwoorden cassatie, rechterlijk bevel, executiegeschil, beleidsvrijheid
Auteurs Prof. mr. A.G. Castermans en Mr. W.Th. Nuninga
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De auteurs bespreken de Urgenda-procedure als civielrechtelijk geschil. Waarom leent het Nederlands privaatrecht zich zo goed voor dit oordeel? Hoe goed past het in de civielrechtelijke traditie? En – wellicht belangrijker – hoe zou een eventueel vervolg hierop er binnen dat civielrechtelijk kader uit kunnen zien?


Prof. mr. A.G. Castermans
Prof. mr. A.G. Castermans is hoogleraar burgerlijk recht aan de Universiteit Leiden en rechter-plaatsvervanger in de rechtbank Den Haag.

Mr. W.Th. Nuninga
Mr. W.Th. Nuninga is verbonden aan het Instituut voor Privaatrecht van de Universiteit Leiden als Meijers PhD Fellow.
Artikel

Access_open De berechting binnen een redelijke termijn

Een empirisch onderzoek naar doorlooptijden in handelszaken

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden redelijke termijn, doorlooptijden
Auteurs Remme Verkerk, Frans van Dijk en Dewy Pistora
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Dit artikel betreft een empirisch onderzoek naar de doorlooptijden in civiele zaken. Het gaat in op de categorie van zaken die te kampen hebben met de langste doorlooptijden: handelszaken met een belang van boven de € 1 miljoen. Van honderd van dergelijke zaken zijn de procedure in eerste aanleg en in hoger beroep nader bestudeerd en is het procesverloop in kaart gebracht. Het onderzoek maakt inzichtelijk welke tijd is gemoeid met de afzonderlijke stappen in de procedure.


Remme Verkerk
Mr. dr. R.R. Verkerk is werkzaam als cassatieadvocaat bij Houthoff en als hoofddocent burgerlijk procesrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht.

Frans van Dijk
Dr. F. van Dijk is werkzaam als hoogleraar empirische analyse van rechtssystemen aan de Universiteit Utrecht. Hij is tevens verbonden aan de Raad voor de rechtspraak.

Dewy Pistora
D. Pistora is onderzoeksassistent aan de Universiteit Utrecht.
Milieu

Access_open Aanscherping van rechtsbescherming en handhaving in milieuzaken: het recht op schone lucht

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 7-8 2020
Trefwoorden luchtkwaliteit, milieurecht, rechtsbescherming, handhaving, rechterlijke toetsing
Auteurs Mr. dr. F.M. Fleurke
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In twee hier te bespreken arresten bouwt het Hof van Justitie voort op de rechtspraak met betrekking tot het recht op schone lucht zoals neergelegd in Richtlijn 2008/50/EG betreffende de luchtkwaliteit en schonere lucht voor Europa.
    De belangrijkste aanvulling die het Hof van Justitie in het Craeynest-arrest geeft, is dat ook de wetenschappelijke beoordeling van de luchtkwaliteit door het bepalen van de plaats van een bemonsteringspunt onderworpen kan worden aan rechterlijke toetsing om zodoende het nuttig effect van de richtlijn te garanderen.
    Het tweede arrest, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, is opzienbarend omdat het Hof van Justitie hierin oordeelde dat het EU-recht onder bepaalde voorwaarden een nationale rechter als ultimum remedium de verplichting geeft gebruik te maken van een nationale bevoegdheid lijfsdwang op te leggen aan het bevoegd gezag als dit stelselmatig weigert milieumaatregelen te nemen in het kader van Richtlijn 2008/50/EG en als niet aannemelijk is dat dit zal veranderen.
    Hoewel gewezen in de context van luchtkwaliteit hebben beide arresten ook implicaties voor andere gebieden uit het milieurecht, zoals biodiversiteit, klimaat en waterkwaliteit.
    HvJ 26 juni 2019, zaak C-723/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:533 (Lies Craeynest e.a./Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest en Brussels Instituut voor Milieubeheer); HvJ 19 december 2019, zaak C-752/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1114 (Deutsche Umwelthilfe eV/Freistaat Bayern)


Mr. dr. F.M. Fleurke
Mr. dr. F.M. (Floor) Fleurke is als universitair hoofddocent Europees milieurecht verbonden aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Access_open Coronacrisis en rechtspleging

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Corona crisis, judiciary, ICT, Court delay, Trias politica
Auteurs Dr. Frans van Dijk en Mr. dr. Eddy Bauw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Four phases of the Corona crisis are distinguished: a first acute phase, the gradual transition to a new normal, the economic downturn and the long run. The article describes what happened in the courts in the first and in the beginning of the second phase, and what is subsequently likely to happen. In the acute phase the court buildings shut down, and adjudication came largely to a halt. The courts were late in opening up, and as a result backlogs of, in particular, criminal cases increased. The courts extended their use of digital tools (e.g. tele-hearings) that, while allowing cases to proceed, did not fully protect the rights of parties. While so far the volume of commercial cases and bankruptcies has not increased, a (rapid) increase is inevitable. Contract breach will be wide spread, and will give rise to fundamental legal issues. For economic recovery it is essential that the courts give clear and consistent guidance in these matters quickly. This requires the courts to reduce the currently long duration of civil cases, and to use the available procedures to get expeditious decisions of the Supreme Court. The courts will also need to develop their ICT-instruments rapidly to guarantee the rights of parties. After a difficult first phase, the courts now face the challenge to effectively guide society through the Corona crisis and its aftermath, and thereby play its role in the trias politica.


Dr. Frans van Dijk
Frans van Dijk is professor Empirische analyse van rechtssystemen, Montaigne Centrum voor rechtsstaat en rechtspleging, Universiteit Utrecht en adviseur van de Raad voor de rechtspraak. Zijn huidige onderzoek gaat over percepties van rechterlijke onafhankelijkheid, fouten in rechterlijke besluitvorming en de rol van de rechtspraak in de economie. Hij heeft enquêtes onder rechters en advocaten georganiseerd voor het Europees Netwerk van Raden voor de rechtspraak.

Mr. dr. Eddy Bauw
Eddy Bauw is hoogleraar Privaatrecht en rechtspleging. Voorzitter van het Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht en programmaleider van het Montaigne Centrum voor rechtsstaat en rechtspleging. Raadsheer-plaatsvervanger gerechtshof Den Haag. Zijn recente onderzoek richt zich op de thema’s collectieve actie, massaschade, rechtspleging en conflictoplossing.
Annotatie

One train! (but different working conditions)

CJEU 19 December 2019, C-16/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1110 (Michael Dobersberger v Magistrat der Stadt Wien)

Tijdschrift Arbeidsrechtelijke Annotaties, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Posting of workers, International train, Transport sector, Subcontracting, Short-term posting
Auteurs Marco Rocca
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Dobersberger decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union deals with the legal situation of posted workers on an international train. These workers, employed by a Hungarian company and based in Hungary, operate on a train connecting Budapest with Salzburg and Munich. The Court concludes against their inclusion under the Posting of Workers Directive, considering their connection to the Austrian territory as too limited. This decision is based on a selective representation of the facts and sits difficultly with the letter of the law and the intention of the legislator.


Marco Rocca
Dr. M. Rocca is werkzaam als CNRS Researcher aan de University of Strasbourg, UMR 7354 DRES, France, https://marcorocca.wordpress.com, mrocca@unistra.fr.
Column

Design of Justice

Over het ontwerp van de zittingszaal

Tijdschrift Boom Strafblad, Aflevering 6 2020
Trefwoorden Innovatief strafrecht, Zittingszaal, Mediation, Strafrecht
Auteurs Mr. K. (Klaartje) Freeke en Mr. W. (Wikke) Monster
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Waar gebruiken we een zittingszaal eigenlijk voor? Als arena voor een strijd? Als een plek waar hoor en wederhoor plaatsvindt? Wat voor ruimte is er nodig om recht te spreken? We zijn met verschillende mensen in gesprek gegaan over deze vragen, ook met wetenschappers, en zo werd de kiem gelegd voor het vak Design of Justice, dat op acht onderwijsinstellingen zal worden gedoceerd. In deze bijdrage doen wij verslag van de eerste resultaten hiervan.


Mr. K. (Klaartje) Freeke
Klaartje Freeke is advocaat en mediator bij het advocatenkantoor Freeke & Monster.

Mr. W. (Wikke) Monster
Wikke Monster is advocaat en mediator bij het advocatenkantoor Freeke & Monster.
Article

Access_open Migration and Time: Duration as an Instrument to Welcome or Restrict

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Migration, EU migration law, time
Auteurs Gerrie Lodder
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    States apply different material conditions to attract or restrict residence of certain types of migrants. But states can also make use of time as an instrument to design more welcoming or more restrictive policies. States can apply faster application procedures for desired migrants. Furthermore, time can be used in a more favourable way to attract desired migrants in regard to duration of residence, access to a form of permanent residence and protection against loss of residence. This contribution makes an analysis of how time is used as an instrument in shaping migration policy by the European Union (EU) legislator in the context of making migration more or less attractive. This analysis shows that two groups are treated more favourably in regard to the use of time in several aspects: EU citizens and economic- and knowledge-related third-country nationals. However, when it comes to the acquisition of permanent residence after a certain period of time, the welcoming policy towards economic- and knowledge-related migrants is no longer obvious.


Gerrie Lodder
Gerrie Lodder is a lecturer and researcher at the Europa Institute of Leiden University.
Article

Access_open Can Non-discrimination Law Change Hearts and Minds?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden law and society, social change, discrimination, non-discrimination law, positive action
Auteurs Anita Böcker
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A question that has preoccupied sociolegal scholars for ages is whether law can change ‘hearts and minds’. This article explores whether non-discrimination law can create social change, and, more particularly, whether it can change attitudes and beliefs as well as external behaviour. The first part examines how sociolegal scholars have theorised about the possibility and desirability of using law as an instrument of social change. The second part discusses the findings of empirical research on the social working of various types of non-discrimination law. What conclusions can be drawn about the ability of non-discrimination law to create social change? What factors influence this ability? And can non-discrimination law change people’s hearts and minds as well as their behaviour? The research literature does not provide an unequivocal answer to the latter question. However, the overall picture emerging from the sociolegal literature is that law is generally more likely to bring about changes in external behaviour and that it can influence attitudes and beliefs only indirectly, by altering the situations in which attitudes and opinions are formed.


Anita Böcker
Anita Böcker is associate professor of Sociology of Law at Radboud University, Nijmegen.
Article

Access_open Positive State Obligations under European Law: A Tool for Achieving Substantive Equality for Sexual Minorities in Europe

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Positive obligations, sexual minorities, sexual orientation, European law, human rights
Auteurs Alina Tryfonidou
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article seeks to examine the development of positive obligations under European law in the specific context of the rights of sexual minorities. It is clear that the law should respect and protect all sexualities and diverse intimate relationships without discrimination, and for this purpose it needs to ensure that sexual minorities can not only be free from state interference when expressing their sexuality in private, but that they should be given the right to express their sexuality in public and to have their intimate relationships legally recognised. In addition, sexual minorities should be protected from the actions of other individuals, when these violate their legal and fundamental human rights. Accordingly, in addition to negative obligations, European law must impose positive obligations towards sexual minorities in order to achieve substantive equality for them. The article explains that, to date, European law has imposed a number of such positive obligations; nonetheless, there is definitely scope for more. It is suggested that European law should not wait for hearts and minds to change before imposing additional positive obligations, especially since this gives the impression that the EU and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are condoning or disregarding persistent discrimination against sexual minorities.


Alina Tryfonidou
Alina Tryfonidou is Professor of Law, University of Reading.
Article

Access_open A Positive State Obligation to Counter Dehumanisation under International Human Rights Law

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Dehumanisation, International Human Rights Law, Positive State obligations, Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
Auteurs Stephanie Eleanor Berry
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    International human rights law (IHRL) was established in the aftermath of the Second World War to prevent a reoccurrence of the atrocities committed in the name of fascism. Central to this aim was the recognition that out-groups are particularly vulnerable to rights violations committed by the in-group. Yet, it is increasingly apparent that out-groups are still subject to a wide range of rights violations, including those associated with mass atrocities. These rights violations are facilitated by the dehumanisation of the out-group by the in-group. Consequently, this article argues that the creation of IHRL treaties and corresponding monitoring mechanisms should be viewed as the first step towards protecting out-groups from human rights violations. By adopting the lens of dehumanisation, this article demonstrates that if IHRL is to achieve its purpose, IHRL monitoring mechanisms must recognise the connection between dehumanisation and rights violations and develop a positive State obligation to counter dehumanisation. The four treaties explored in this article, the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, all establish positive State obligations to prevent hate speech and to foster tolerant societies. These obligations should, in theory, allow IHRL monitoring mechanisms to address dehumanisation. However, their interpretation of the positive State obligation to foster tolerant societies does not go far enough to counter unconscious dehumanisation and requires more detailed elaboration.


Stephanie Eleanor Berry
Stephanie Eleanor Berry is Senior Lecturer in International Human Rights Law, University of Sussex.
Article

Access_open How Far Should the State Go to Counter Prejudice?

A Positive State Obligation to Counter Dehumanisation

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden prejudice, soft paternalism, empathy, liberalism, employment discrimination, access to goods and services
Auteurs Ioanna Tourkochoriti
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article argues that it is legitimate for the state to practice soft paternalism towards changing hearts and minds in order to prevent behaviour that is discriminatory. Liberals accept that it is not legitimate for the state to intervene in order to change how people think because ideas and beliefs are wrong in themselves. It is legitimate for the state to intervene with the actions of a person only when there is a risk of harm to others and when there is a threat to social coexistence. Preventive action of the state is legitimate if we consider the immaterial and material harm that discrimination causes. It causes harm to the social standing of the person, psychological harm, economic and existential harm. All these harms threaten peaceful social coexistence. This article traces a theory of permissible government action. Research in the areas of behavioural psychology, neuroscience and social psychology indicates that it is possible to bring about a change in hearts and minds. Encouraging a person to adopt the perspective of the person who has experienced discrimination can lead to empathetic understanding. This, can lead a person to critically evaluate her prejudice. The paper argues that soft paternalism towards changing hearts and minds is legitimate in order to prevent harm to others. It attempts to legitimise state coercion in order to eliminate prejudice and broader social patterns of inequality and marginalisation. And it distinguishes between appropriate and non-appropriate avenues the state could pursue in order to eliminate prejudice. Policies towards eliminating prejudice should address the rational and the emotional faculties of a person. They should aim at using methods and techniques that focus on persuasion and reduce coercion. They should raise awareness of what prejudice is and how it works in order to facilitate well-informed voluntary decisions. The version of soft paternalism towards changing minds and attitudes defended in this article makes it consistent with liberalism.


Ioanna Tourkochoriti
Ioanna Tourkochoriti is Lecturer Above the Bar, NUI Galway School of Law.
Article

Access_open The Potential of Positive Obligations Against Romaphobic Attitudes and in the Development of ‘Roma Pride’

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Roma, Travellers, positive obligations, segregation, culturally adequate accommodation
Auteurs Lilla Farkas en Theodoros Alexandridis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article analyses the jurisprudence of international tribunals on the education and housing of Roma and Travellers to understand whether positive obligations can change the hearts and minds of the majority and promote minority identities. Case law on education deals with integration rather than cultural specificities, while in the context of housing it accommodates minority needs. Positive obligations have achieved a higher level of compliance in the latter context by requiring majorities to tolerate the minority way of life in overwhelmingly segregated settings. Conversely, little seems to have changed in education, where legal and institutional reform, as well as a shift in both majority and minority attitudes, would be necessary to dismantle social distance and generate mutual trust. The interlocking factors of accessibility, judicial activism, European politics, expectations of political allegiance and community resources explain jurisprudential developments. The weak justiciability of minority rights, the lack of resources internal to the community and dual identities among the Eastern Roma impede legal claims for culture-specific accommodation in education. Conversely, the protection of minority identity and community ties is of paramount importance in the housing context, subsumed under the right to private and family life.


Lilla Farkas
Lilla Farkas is a practising lawyer in Hungary and recently earned a PhD from the European University Institute entitled ‘Mobilising for racial equality in Europe: Roma rights and transnational justice’. She is the race ground coordinator of the European Union’s Network of Legal Experts in Gender Equality and Non-discrimination.

Theodoros Alexandridis
Theodoros Alexandridis is a practicing lawyer in Greece.

    The entry into force of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) pushed state obligations to counter prejudice and stereotypes concerning people with disabilities to the forefront of international human rights law. The CRPD is underpinned by a model of inclusive equality, which views disability as a social construct that results from the interaction between persons with impairments and barriers, including attitudinal barriers, that hinder their participation in society. The recognition dimension of inclusive equality, together with the CRPD’s provisions on awareness raising, mandates that states parties target prejudice and stereotypes about the capabilities and contributions of persons with disabilities to society. Certain human rights treaty bodies, including the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and, to a much lesser extent, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, require states to eradicate harmful stereotypes and prejudice about people with disabilities in various forms of interpersonal relationships. This trend is also reflected, to a certain extent, in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article assesses the extent to which the aforementioned human rights bodies have elaborated positive obligations requiring states to endeavour to change ‘hearts and minds’ about the inherent capabilities and contributions of people with disabilities. It analyses whether these bodies have struck the right balance in elaborating positive obligations to eliminate prejudice and stereotypes in interpersonal relationships. Furthermore, it highlights the convergences or divergences that are evident in the bodies’ approaches to those obligations.


Andrea Broderick
Andrea Broderick is Assistant Professor at the Universiteit Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Artikel

Leren van evaluaties

De fitness check van het Europees consumentenrecht

Tijdschrift RegelMaat, Aflevering 5 2020
Trefwoorden Betere regelgeving, Evaluaties, Europese beleidscyclus, Europese Commissie
Auteurs Dr. E.A.G. van Schagen LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De ervaringen met de fitness check van het Europees consumentenrecht laten zien hoe de richtlijnen voor fitness checks in de Richtsnoeren voor Betere Regelgeving in de praktijk worden gebracht. Een fitness check beoogt, onder meer, om consistentie en coherentie te verbeteren, en zou informatie moeten verzamelen over de gezamenlijke impact van maatregelen. Hoewel de Nederlandse wetgever niet heeft aangegeven fitness checks te willen invoeren, zijn de ervaringen met de fitness check van het consumentenrecht toch interessant voor de Nederlandse wetgever. In dit artikel wordt ingegaan op wat kan worden geleerd van de ervaringen met de fitness check van het Europees consumentenrecht.


Dr. E.A.G. van Schagen LLM
Dr. E.A.G. (Esther) van Schagen (LLM) is universitair docent bij de Faculteit Recht, Economie, Bestuur en Organisatie van de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Access_open Uit- en overlevering van EU-burgers bij overtreding van het kartelverbod – op het snijvlak van straf- en mededingingsrecht

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Bijzonder Strafrecht & Handhaving, Aflevering 6 2020
Trefwoorden uit- en overlevering, kartelverbod, mededingingswet, lijstfeiten, dubbele strafbaarheid
Auteurs Mr. W.W. Geursen en Mr. J. Boonstra-Verhaert
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In Nederland wordt het mededingingsrecht (nog steeds) bestuursrechtelijk afgedaan. De strafrechtelijke handhaving van dit rechtsgebied heeft de laatste jaren in andere landen een opmars gemaakt; ook in verschillende lidstaten van de Europese Unie. Hoewel in Nederland het mededingingsrecht een ‘strafrechtelijk verleden’ kent, werd deze handhavingsvorm weinig benut en/of was deze weinig succesvol en is hiervan afscheid genomen. Dat Nederland overtredingen van de mededingingswet nu niet strafrechtelijk sanctioneert, wil echter niet zeggen dat aan mededingingsrechtelijke overtredingen voor Nederlanders geen strafrechtelijke risico’s kleven. Indien dergelijke overtredingen door Nederlandse onderdanen in het buitenland effect hebben, omdat daar bijvoorbeeld de klanten van een kartel zijn gevestigd, kunnen Nederlanders alsnog – zij het in het buitenland – tegen strafrechtelijke vervolging en een veroordeling aanlopen.


Mr. W.W. Geursen
Mr. W.W. Geursen is werkzaam als Senior Legal Adviser bij De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek en is als buitenpromovendus verbonden aan de Vrije Universiteit.

Mr. J. Boonstra-Verhaert
Mr. J. Boonstra-Verhaert is initiator van actualiteitenwebsite BijzonderStrafrecht.nl, werkzaam als Senior Legal Adviser bij De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek en is als eindredacteur verbonden aan TBS&H.
Article

Access_open South African Mandatory Offers Regime: Assessing Minorities’ Leverage to Seek Recourse and Equal Treatment in Takeover Bids

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden company takeovers, mandatory offers, minority shareholders, equal treatment, acquisition procedure
Auteurs Paul Nkoane
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A firm intention announcement must be made when the offeror is able and willing to acquire securities, and when a mandatory offer must be made. When the firm intention announcement is implemented, some sort of a contract is created. This rule has helped to determine the particular time the offeror should be liable to minorities. The question of when the offeror should bear the obligation to implement mandatory offers in aborted takeovers is thus no more problematic. Previously, the courts wrestled with this issue, but delivered what appears to be unsatisfactory decisions. This article will discuss the effect of a firm intention announcement and the responsibility that attends the making of that announcement. It intends to illustrate the extent of liability the offeror must bear in the event of a lapsed takeover, before and after the making of the firm intention announcement. The article examines the manner in which takeover rules can be enforced, and whether the current measures afford minorities proper protection. This brings to light the issue of equal treatment in takeovers and the fallacy thereof. A minor appraisal of the takeover rules in two jurisdictions in Europe (the United Kingdom and the Netherlands) is conducted to assess how equal treatment for minorities is promoted. Due to the difficulty minorities may experience in enforcing equal treatment in company takeovers, the article advocates for the alteration of the current South African takeover procedure for the promotion of minorities’ interests and for establishing rules that provide the offeror adequate information.


Paul Nkoane
Paul Nkoane is a lecturer at the College of Law of the University of South Africa in Pretoria.
Case Reports

2020/18 Prohibition of dismissal of pregnant employee (RO)

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Gender discrimination
Auteurs Andreea Suciu en Teodora Mănăilă
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Analysing the national legal framework in relation to the protection of pregnant employees and employees who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding, provisions which transposed the regulations of Directive 92/85/EEC and of the conclusions in case C-103/16, Jessica Porras Guisado – v – Bankia S.A. and Others, the Constitutional Court of Romania ascertained that the dismissal prohibition of a pregnant employee is strictly restricted to reasons that have a direct connection with the employee’s pregnancy status. As for other cases where the termination of the employment contract is the result of disciplinary misconduct, unexcused absence from work, non-observance of labour discipline, or termination of employment for economic reasons or collective redundancies, the employer must submit in writing well-reasoned grounds for dismissal.


Andreea Suciu
Andreea Suciu is Managing Partner and attorney-at-law at Suciu | The Employment Law Firm, Bucharest, Romania.

Teodora Mănăilă
Teodora Mănăilă is Managing Partner and attorney-at-law at Suciu | The Employment Law Firm, Bucharest, Romania.

    Within the context of a transfer of undertaking in an asset reliant group of companies, the court should not just focus on whether the assets have been transferred between the two separate group companies, but also on whether one group company had actual control over the operation of the other group company.


Zef Even
Zef Even is a partner at SteensmaEven, Rotterdam, professor at Erasmus School of Law and editor-in-chief of EELC.

Eva Poutsma
Eva Poutsma is an attorney-at-law at SteensmaEven, Rotterdam.

    In a recent Supreme Court decision, it was held by a 4-1 majority that there is no reason, in principle, why the provision of ‘reasonable accommodation’ for an employee with a disability should not involve the redistribution of duties.


Orla O’Leary
Orla O’Leary is an attorney-at-law at Mason Hayes & Curran, Dublin.
Artikel

Access_open Restraint as a Source of Judicial ‘Apoliticality’

A Functional Reconstruction

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Urgenda, Miller v. Secretary of State, Norm of judicial apoliticality, Ronald Dworkin, Judicial restraint
Auteurs Maurits Helmich
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Few legal theorists today would argue that the domain of law exists in isolation from other normative spheres governing society, notably from the domain of ‘politics’. Nevertheless, the implicit norm that judges should not act ‘politically’ remains influential and widespread in the debates surrounding controversial court cases. This article aims to square these two observations. Taking the Miller v. Secretary of State and Urgenda cases as illustrative case studies, the article demonstrates that what it means for judges to adjudicate cases ‘apolitically’ is itself a matter of controversy. In reflecting on their own constitutional role, courts are forced to take a stance on substantive questions of political philosophy. Nevertheless, that does not mean that the ‘norm of judicial apoliticality’ should therefore be rejected. The norm’s coherence lies in its intersocial function: its role in declaring certain modes of judicial interpretation and intervention legitimate (‘legal’/‘judicial’) or illegitimate (‘political’).


Maurits Helmich
Maurits Helmich is promovendus aan de afdeling Sociologie, Theorie en Methodologie van het Recht aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 621 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 31 32
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.