Zoekresultaat: 457 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open Space and Socialization in Legal Education: A Symbolic Interactionism Approach

Special Issue on Pragmatism and Legal Education, Sanne ­Taekema & Thomas Riesthuis (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, april 2021
Trefwoorden legal education, pragmatism, symbolic interactionism, sociology of space
Auteurs Karolina Kocemba
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article deals with the possibility of socializing law students through space. It first indicates which features of space affect the possibility of influencing interactions and identity. It then discusses how we can use symbolic interactionism to study interactions and socialization in spaces of law faculties. Then, on the basis of the interviews conducted with law faculty students about their space perception, it shows how to research student socialization through space and how far-reaching its effects can be.


Karolina Kocemba
Karolina Kocemba, MA, is PhD student at the University of Wroclaw; Uniwersytet Wroclawski, Wroclaw, Poland.

Gijs van Maanen
Gijs van Maanen is PhD researcher at Tilburg Law School.
Artikel

Access_open Art, Science and the Poetry of Justice – ­Pragmatist Aesthetics and Its Importance for Law and Legal Education

Special Issue on Pragmatism and Legal Education ­Sanne Taekema & Thomas Riesthuis (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, maart 2021
Trefwoorden legal research, legal education, epistemology, law, science and art
Auteurs Wouter de Been
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Classic pragmatists like John Dewey entertained an encompassing notion of science. This pragmatic belief in the continuities between a scientific, ethical and cultural understanding of the world went into decline in the middle of the 20th century. To many mid-century American and English philosophers it suggested a simplistic faith that philosophy and science could address substantive questions about values, ethics and aesthetics in a rigorous way. This critique of classic pragmatism has lost some of its force in the last few decades with the rise of neo-pragmatism, but it still has a hold over disciplines like economics and law. In this article I argue that this criticism of pragmatism is rooted in a narrow conception of what science entails and what philosophy should encompass. I primarily focus on one facet: John Dewey’s work on art and aesthetics. I explain why grappling with the world aesthetically, according to Dewey, is closely related to dealing with it scientifically, for instance, through the poetic and aesthetic development of metaphors and concepts to come to terms with reality. This makes his theory of art relevant, I argue, not only to studying and understanding law, but also to teaching law.


Wouter de Been
Wouter de Been is a legal theorist who has written widely on pragmatism and legal realism. I would like to thank the reviewers for their comments. Their critical commentary made this a much better article. Any remaining shortcomings are of course my own. I dedicate this article to the memory of Willem Witteveen, who always saw the art in law.

    Sinds inwerkingtreding van de WAMCA kent de collectieve actie een procedurele tweedeling in een ontvankelijkheidsfase en een inhoudelijke fase. Inhoudelijke behandeling van de vordering vindt ingevolge art. 1018c lid 5 Rv pas plaats indien en nadat de rechter over de ontvankelijkheid heeft beslist. De vraag is in hoeverre de twee fasen los van elkaar kunnen worden gezien, nu elementen van de ontvankelijkheidstoets nauw zijn verweven met de inhoudelijke beoordeling. De auteur maakt een vergelijking met de Amerikaanse federale class action, die een soortgelijke problematiek kent, en betoogt dat een genuanceerde toepassing van art. 1018c lid 5 Rv aangewezen is.


Pim Wissink
Mr. P.G.J. Wissink is promovendus en docent burgerlijk recht aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Artikel

Nikola Tesla en de coltrui-CEO: de gevaren van informatiemanipulatie

Vertrouwen van het beleggend of het algemeen publiek?

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Ondernemingsrecht, Aflevering 1-2 2021
Trefwoorden marktmisbruik, marktmanipulatie, marktintegriteit, investor confidence, public confidence
Auteurs Mr. M.J. Giltjes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De auteur betoogt dat met de doelstellingen achter het informatiemanipulatieverbod van de Marktmisbruikverordening wordt beoogd het vertrouwen van het algemeen publiek, in tegenstelling tot slechts het vertrouwen van het beleggend publiek, te waarborgen. Een helder begrip van deze doelstellingen is noodzakelijk voor de effectieve handhaving van het informatiemanipulatieverbod.


Mr. M.J. Giltjes
Mr. M.J. Giltjes is promovendus bij Erasmus Graduate School of Law en fellow van het International Center for Financial law & Governance (ICFG).
Artikel

Access_open ‘Ik verblijf in een gevangenis, daar is niets moreels aan.’ Ervaren procedurele rechtvaardigheid bij binnenkomst in vreemdelingenbewaring.

Tijdschrift Crimmigratie & Recht, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden procedurele rechtvaardigheid, legitimiteit, vreemdelingenbewaring, binnenkomstprocedure, vreemdelingen
Auteurs Nicolien de Gier MSc, Mieke Kox MA, Prof. mr. dr. Miranda Boone e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Qualitative research in an immigration detention center in the Netherlands shows that detained unauthorized migrants consider the entry procedure in Immigration Centre Rotterdam procedurally just. These migrants are generally positive on the fairness of the entry procedure as their safety and welfare are guaranteed and existing procedural justice criteria are respected. However, they believe that immigration detention in itself is illegitimate and that they do not deserve to be detained. This shows that the focus on procedures and interactions is insufficient to understand the perceived legitimacy of immigration detention if shared values and consent with the legal basis of immigration detention are lacking.


Nicolien de Gier MSc
C.N. de Gier MSc is docent Criminologie bij de Universiteit Leiden.

Mieke Kox MA
M.H. Kox MA is postdoc Sociale Geografie bij de Universiteit Utrecht.

Prof. mr. dr. Miranda Boone
Prof. mr. dr. M.M. Boone is hoogleraar Criminologie en Vergelijkende Penologie bij de Universiteit Leiden.

Dr. Gabry Vanderveen
Dr. G.N.G. Vanderveen is universitair docent Erasmus School of Law bij de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Het effect van een pro Justitia-rapportage op de bewijsbeslissing: een empirische verkenning

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Pro Justitia, Guilt, Conviction, Forensic mental health report
Auteurs Roosmarijn van Es MSc., Dr. Janne van Doorn, Prof. dr. Jan de Keijser e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A forensic mental health report is requested in about 30% of more serious cases presented to the criminal court. These reports can be used at sentencing and advise the judge on criminal responsibility, recidivism risk, and possible treatment measures, but is not a formal factor in decisions about guilt. The current study focuses on the (unwarranted) effect of forensic mental health information on conviction decisions. Using an experimental vignette study among 155 criminology students, results show that when a mental disorder is present, conviction rates are higher than when such information is absent. In line with the story model of judicial decision-making, additional analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the evaluation of guilt rather than by the evaluation of other physical evidence. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.


Roosmarijn van Es MSc.
Roosmarijn van Es is promovenda bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de rol van informatie in pro Justitia-rapportages in rechterlijke beslissingen over bewijs en straf.

Dr. Janne van Doorn
Janne van Doorn is universitair docent bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. Jan de Keijser
Jan de Keijser is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. mr. Maarten Kunst
Maarten Kunst is hoogleraar Criminologie bij het Instituut voor Strafrecht en Criminologie aan Universiteit Leiden.
Discussie

‘Let op! Hier wordt gehandhaafd’

Handhavingsonderzoek in vier decennia Recht der Werkelijkheid

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2020
Auteurs Marc Hertogh
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Because of the sharp contrast between the law-in-the-books and the law-in-action regulatory enforcement has always been a popular subject in socio-legal research. This paper looks back at forty years of Dutch research on regulatory enforcement, using several key publications in this journal from each decade. First, it is argued that these Dutch studies reveal three general themes: this research can be seen as a time machine that takes us back to some of the most important social and political events of the past decades, these studies emphasize the crucial role of individual enforcement officials, and in everyday enforcement state law only plays a limited role. Next, this review also discusses some of the strengths and weaknesses of Dutch research. Most studies on regulatory enforcement are more interested in the role of the state than in the role of citizens and businesses. As a result, research focuses more on issues of effectiveness and less on questions of legitimacy. Finally, empirical research is seen as more important than theory development. Based on this overview, the author introduces a new research agenda for future research on regulatory enforcement.


Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Hij was eerder redactiesecretaris en redactielid van Recht der Werkelijkheid en is sinds 2020 voorzitter van de redactieraad.
Discussie

Van big five naar high five?

Plaats en invloed van de rechtssociologische hoogleraren aan de Nederlandse juridische faculteiten

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Rechtssociologie, Juridische opleidingen, Eén inleiding voor studenten, Samenwerking tussen hoogleraren, Sociaal wetenschappelijk onderzoek
Auteurs Prof. Mr Nick Huls
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In From big five to high five the author analyzes the developments of sociology of law at the law faculties in the Netherlands since the 1970ies until today. Focusing on the professors (‘chairs’) he argues that after a strong start with five prominent scholars the discipline is now placed in the periphery of the law curriculum. Sociology of law is ‘intellectually strong, but institutionally weak’.
    The author encourages the present generation professors (‘chairs’) to cooperate more. He claims that writing one modern Dutch Introduction to Sociology of law is crucial to win the hearts and minds of the law students. Furthermore, he suggests that collaborative research projects contributes to the visibility of sociology of law in policy arenas and public debates.


Prof. Mr Nick Huls
Nick Huls is emeritus hoogleraar rechtssociologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit en de Universiteit Leiden. Van 2001 tot 2006 was hij lid van de redactie van Recht der Werkelijkheid. Zijn huidige onderzoeksbelangstellingen zijn de schuldenproblematiek tijdens corona, vechtscheidingen en probleemoplossende rechtspraak.

Dr. Nienke Doornbos
Nienke Doornbos is universitair docent Rechtssociologie aan de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Haar onderzoek richt zich onder meer op beroepsethische kwesties bij juridische beroepen.

Dr. Paulien de Winter
Paulien de Winter is universitair docent Empirisch Juridisch Onderzoek bij de Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid aan de Rijksuniversiteit in Groningen. Zij doet onderzoek naar hoe uitvoerende medewerkers omgaan met regels.

    From day one of the journal Recht der Werkelijkheid (Journal of Living Law) the Legal Anthropology was welcomed. What once started as the jurisprudential study on Folk Law on the one hand and the cultural anthropological study of law on the other hand, evolved into an intensive collaboration among the researchers. Even more intensive under the subject Legal Pluralism. The legal anthropological studies extended over the years to subjects closer to the First World legal practices, i.e. the studies of social groups like the one on migrants. Under the concept of semi autonomous social fields many contributions on cultural versus legal norms were published. Later on, the legal anthropological expertise that sustained the comparative studies for international and supranational law was welcomed. The article thus shows that the journal provided room for the socio legal studies of law practices in other continents, expanded to those of other continents in the home continent as well as to those in all continents.


Agnes Schreiner
Agnes Schreiner was tot de AOW-gerechtigde leeftijd universitair docent en wetenschappelijk onderzoeker bij de Afdeling Algemene rechtsleer, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Tegenwoordig is ze als gastonderzoeker aan dezelfde afdeling en faculteit verbonden. Ze was van 1985-1999 redactielid en van 1989-1995 tevens redactiesecretaris van Recht der Werkelijkheid. In 2007 trad ze toe tot de redactieraad van RdW.
Discussie

Rechtspleging in Recht der Werkelijkheid

Popper is niet blij, maar het is feest

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2020
Auteurs Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The paper highlights the contributions on judges and courts published in Recht der Werkelijkheid from 1980-2020. It addresses three general themes, namely communication in court, the consumers of the law and the professionals of the law, in view of the objective of the journal.
    The authors of the contributions, newcomers as well as well-known experienced researchers, come from different kind of branches like anthropology, psychology, sociology and history, utilizing quite different approaches, methodologies and theories. They elaborate on each other’s work, methods, empirical findings and theoretical insights, in order to develop new research questions or to conduct research in different contexts. Although the critical-rational ideas of Popper has no many followers among the authors, lessons can be learned for policy makers, judges, lawyers and academics. By bringing the authors together, the journal has made an invaluable contribution to the debate among socio-legal researchers in the Netherlands.


Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen
Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen is emeritus hoogleraar Rechtspleging en sinds 1995 verbonden aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen. Zij was eerder redactiesecretaris en redactielid van Recht der Werkelijkheid en tot medio 2020 voorzitter van de redactieraad.
Article

Access_open Mechanisms for Correcting Judicial Errors in Germany

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden criminal proceedings, retrial in favour of the convicted, retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant, Germany, judicial errors
Auteurs Michael Lindemann en Fabienne Lienau
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article presents the status quo of the law of retrial in Germany and gives an overview of the law and practice of the latter in favour of the convicted and to the disadvantage of the defendant. Particularly, the formal and material prerequisites for a successful petition to retry the criminal case are subject to a detailed presentation and evaluation. Because no official statistics are kept regarding successful retrial processes in Germany, the actual number of judicial errors is primarily the subject of more or less well-founded estimates by legal practitioners and journalists. However, there are a few newer empirical studies devoted to different facets of the subject. These studies will be discussed in this article in order to outline the state of empirical research on the legal reality of the retrial procedure. Against this background, the article will ultimately highlight currently discussed reforms and subject these to a critical evaluation as well. The aim of the recent reform efforts is to add a ground for retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant for cases in which new facts or evidence indicate that the acquitted person was guilty. After detailed discussion, the proposal in question is rejected, inter alia for constitutional reasons.


Michael Lindemann
Michael Lindemann is Professor for Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Criminology at the Faculty of Law of Bielefeld University, Germany.

Fabienne Lienau
Fabienne Lienau is Research Assistant at the Chair held by Michael Lindemann.
Artikel

Kwantificering van de voor- en nadelen van duurzaamheidsafspraken onder artikel 6 lid 3 Mededingingswet

Tijdschrift Markt & Mededinging, Aflevering 4-5 2020
Trefwoorden duurzaamheid, afspraken, KBA, WZA, capaciteitenbenadering
Auteurs Eva van der Zee
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Deze bijdrage richt zich op de mogelijkheden en beperkingen om voor- en nadelen van een duurzaamheidsafspraak te kwantificeren onder artikel 6 lid 3 Mededingingswet gebaseerd op de kosten-batenanalyse, de welzijnsanalyse en de capaciteitenbenadering.


Eva van der Zee
Dr. E. van der Zee LL.M. is universitair docent aan het Instituut Recht en Economie van de Universiteit van Hamburg.
Article

Access_open The Right to Claim Innocence in Poland

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden wrongful convictions, right to claim innocence, reopening of criminal proceedings, miscarriage of justice, revision of final judgment
Auteurs Wojciech Jasiński Ph.D., habilitation en Karolina Kremens Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice, their reasons and effects, only rarely become the subject of academic debate in Poland. This article aims at filling this gap and providing a discussion on the current challenges of mechanisms available in Polish law focused on the verification of final judgments based on innocence claims. While there are two procedures designed to move such judgment: cassation and the reopening of criminal proceedings, only the latter aims at the verification of new facts and evidence, and this work remains focused exactly on that issue. The article begins with a case study of the famous Komenda case, which resulted in a successful innocence claim, serving as a good, though rare, example of reopening a case and acquitting the convict immediately and allows for discussing the reasons that commonly stand behind wrongful convictions in Poland. Furthermore, the article examines the innocence claim grounds as regulated in the Polish criminal procedure and their interpretation under the current case law. It also presents the procedure concerning the revision of the case. The work additionally provides the analysis of the use of innocence claim in practice, feeding on the statistical data and explaining tendencies in application for revision of a case. It also presents the efforts of the Polish Ombudsman and NGOs to raise public awareness in that field. The final conclusions address the main challenges that the Polish system faces concerning innocence claims and indicates the direction in which the system should go.


Wojciech Jasiński Ph.D., habilitation
Wojciech Jasiński is Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Procedure of the University of Wroclaw, Poland. orcid.org/0000-0002-7427-1474

Karolina Kremens Ph.D.
Karolina Kremens is Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Procedure of the University of Wroclaw, Poland. orcid.org/0000-0002-2132-2645
Article

Access_open The Challenges for England’s Post-Conviction Review Body

Deference to Juries, the Principle of Finality and the Court of Appeal

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden wrongful conviction, criminal justice, Criminal Cases Review Commission, Court of Appeal, discretion
Auteurs Carolyn Hoyle
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Since 1997, the Criminal Cases Review Commission of England, Wales and Northern Ireland has served as a state-funded post-conviction body to consider claims of wrongful conviction for those who have exhausted their rights to appeal. A meticulous organisation that has over its lifetime referred over 700 cases back to the Court of Appeal, resulting in over 60% of those applicants having their convictions quashed, it is nonetheless restricted in its response to cases by its own legislation. This shapes its decision-making in reviewing cases, causing it to be somewhat deferential to the original jury, to the principle of finality and, most importantly, to the Court of Appeal, the only institution that can overturn a wrongful conviction. In mandating such deference, the legislation causes the Commission to have one eye on the Court’s evolving jurisprudence but leaves room for institutional and individual discretion, evidenced in some variability in responses across the Commission. While considerable variability would be difficult to defend, some inconsistency raises the prospects for a shift towards a less deferential referral culture. This article draws on original research by the author to consider the impact of institutional deference on the work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission and argues for a slightly bolder approach in its work


Carolyn Hoyle
Carolyn Hoyle is Professor of Criminology at the Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, UK.
Article

Access_open Exoneration in Sweden

Is It Not about Time to Reform the Swedish Model?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden wrongful convictions, extraordinary legal remedy, exoneration, exoneration in Sweden
Auteurs Dennis Martinsson
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article reviews exoneration in Sweden, with a focus on the procedure of applying for exoneration. First, it highlights some core features of Swedish criminal procedural law, necessary to understand exoneration in the Swedish context. Secondly, it outlines the possibilities in Swedish law to apply for exoneration, both in favour of a convicted person and to the disadvantage of a previously acquitted defendant. Thirdly, it identifies some challenges with the current Swedish model of administering applications for exoneration. Fourthly, it argues that the current system should be reformed by introducing into Swedish law a review committee that administers applications for exoneration.


Dennis Martinsson
Dennis Martinsson is Assistant Professor in the Department of Law of Stockholm University in Sweden.
Artikel

Alsof slachtofferschap een verhaal is: de narratieve victimologie en haar grenzen

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden victimology, narrative criminology, cultural criminology, Susan Brison, Hans Vaihinger
Auteurs Prof. dr. Antony Pemberton
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article adopts German philosopher Hans Vaihinger’s Philosophy of “as if” as a vehicle to sketch the main features of the emerging research domain of narrative victimology, as well as address some of its limitations. Vaihinger emphasizes the importance of useful untruths, i.e. things we know to be untrue, but nevertheless behave as if they are not, if that strengthens their use as instruments for us to find our way more easily in the world. This applies to our daily lives, but also to our societal institutions and the models and metaphors that underlie our approaches to (social) science. The paper argues that the narrative metaphor of the historical event is often more apt to enhance our understanding of victimological phenomena than that of the mechanism, which is the default metaphor of (social) science. The paper subsequently describes four areas of inquiry of narrative victimology: victimisation’s impact on (life) stories; narratives in the aftermath of victimization; narratives of victim’s experiences with justice processes and the coincidence and juxtaposition of the victims’ narrative with narratives of other significant parties. For all its merits however, the narrative metaphor is also a “useful untruth”, equipped with its own limitations, for instance the difficulty of language in describing first hand experiences of victims and the possibility that narrative structures will be imposed upon victim experiences.


Prof. dr. Antony Pemberton
Prof. dr. Antony Pemberton is hoogleraar herstelrecht aan het Leuven Institute of Criminology, KU Leuven en senior onderzoeker aan het Nederlands Studiecentrum voor Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving (NSCR) in Amsterdam. Als onderdeel van die laatste functie is hij tevens gedetacheerd als hoogleraar victimologie aan Tilburg University.
Article

Access_open A European Approach to Revision in Criminal Matters?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2020
Auteurs Joost Nan, Nina Holvast en Sjarai Lestrade
Auteursinformatie

Joost Nan
Joost Nan is Associate Professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Nina Holvast
Nina Holvast is Assistant Professor at the Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Sjarai Lestrade
Sjarai Lestrade is Assistant Professor at the Radboud University Nijmegen.
Toont 1 - 20 van 457 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22 23
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.