Zoekresultaat: 80 artikelen

x
Article

Access_open Age Limits in Youth Justice

A Comparative and Conceptual Analysis

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden youth justice, age limits, minimum age of criminal responsibility, age of criminal majority, legal comparison
Auteurs Jantien Leenknecht, Johan Put en Katrijn Veeckmans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In each youth justice system, several age limits exist that indicate what type of reaction can and may be connected to the degree of responsibility that a person can already bear. Civil liability, criminal responsibility and criminal majority are examples of concepts on which age limits are based, but whose definition and impact is not always clear. Especially as far as the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) is concerned, confusion exists in legal doctrine. This is apparent from the fact that international comparison tables often show different MACRs for the same country. Moreover, the international literature often seems to define youth justice systems by means of a lower and upper limit, whereas such a dual distinction is too basic to comprehend the complex multilayer nature of the systems. This contribution therefore maps out and conceptually clarifies the different interpretations and consequences of the several age limits that exist within youth justice systems. To that extent, the age limits of six countries are analysed: Argentina, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Northern Ireland. This legal comparison ultimately leads to a proposal to establish a coherent conceptual framework on age limits in youth justice.


Jantien Leenknecht
Jantien Leenknecht is PhD Fellow of the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.

Johan Put
Johan Put is Full Professor at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.

Katrijn Veeckmans
Katrijn Veeckmans is PhD Fellow at KU Leuven, Institute of Social Law and Leuven Institute of Criminology.
Wetenschap

Human Rights Provisions in General Corporate Lending

How banks could implement their responsibility to respect human rights by including human rights provisions in corporate lending documentation

Tijdschrift Onderneming en Financiering, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Banks, Human rights, Corporate lending, Sustainability linked loans, LMA
Auteurs Mr. W.B. de Boer en Prof. M. Scheltema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article focusses on the role of banks in the area of human rights and corporate lending. By including contractual provisions on human rights in loan documentation, banks can manage human rights risks. Banks could hereby build on the emerging practice of the ‘sustainability linked loans’ by including predetermined sustainability targets focused on human rights. The international loan market currently lacks a level playing field on including human rights provisions. This article concludes with providing guidance for human rights provisions in loan agreements, based on standard loan market (LMA) documentation.


Mr. W.B. de Boer
Mr. W.B. (Wilke) de Boer is momenteel werkzaam als bedrijfsjurist duurzame financiering bij de NWB Bank en was op het moment van schrijven werkzaam voor de Sociaal-Economische Raad.

Prof. M. Scheltema
Prof. M. (Martijn) Scheltema is verbonden aan de Erasmus Universiteit. Daarnaast is hij nog partner en voorzitter van de praktijkgroep mensenrechten van Pels Reijcken en voorzitter van het bindende geschillenbeslechtingsmechanisme van de Nederlandse Internationaal Responsible Business Conduct Agreement in de textielsector.
Artikel

Ethical guidelines for mediators – the Austrian status quo

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2-3 2019
Trefwoorden Austria, Code of Conduct, Disciplinary Control, Ethical Guidelines
Auteurs Anne-Karin Grill
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Austrian mediation landscape is quite inhomogeneous, with no universally applicable framework in place to safeguard best practice standards in mediation. Any commitment of mediators to codes of conduct or ethical guidelines occurs on an entirely voluntary basis. Control mechanisms exist in the form of complaint bodies instituted at the level of Austrian mediation associations.


Anne-Karin Grill
Anne-Karin Grill is Attorney-at-Law and partner at Vavrovsky Heine Marth Rechtsanwälte and CEDR Accredited Mediator in Vienna, Austria.

    In this article, the author discusses mediation law and practice in Australia, with a focus on commercial disputes. Statistical data collected in several Australian jurisdictions suggest that mandatory referral works out positively. The author concludes with some observations as to the potential usefulness of the Australian model for court-referred mediation in Europe.


Justus Hoefnagel
Justus Hoefnagel is advocaat bij Linklaters LLP in Amsterdam en werkte van eind 2017 tot eind 2019 in Australië bij Allens, een advocatenkantoor in Perth, West-Australië, in het kader van een tweejarig secondment. Hij werkte daar mee aan de behandeling van procedures ter zake commerciële geschillen bij Australische rechtbanken.
Artikel

Slovenia’s experience with mediation incentives

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2019
Trefwoorden mediation, court-annexed model, incentives, court backlog reduction
Auteurs Katarina Kresal
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Slovenia realized very early that mediation as a form of a more flexible, consumer-friendly and interest-driven procedure can also be utilised as an effective means of court backlog reduction. The court-annexed mediation model was launched in 2001 without any regulatory framework as a pilot project at the District Court of Ljubljana. As a consequence of the successful pilot project court-annexed mediation was introduced into every first-instance and second-instance court. The main incentives for the mediation model were that it was free of charge, i.e. the costs of mediation were included into the court budgets, that it was performed by judges trained as mediators and that attorneys were included into the process at a very early stage. Mediation has become widely accepted, as the voluntary uptake by the parties is quite high and referral to mediation by judges against the will of litigants is rather an exception.


Katarina Kresal
Katarina Kresal is an Attorney and Founder and President of the European Centre for Dispute Resolution. As an ADR expert she specializes in designing mediation systems and ADR schemes.

    The author discusses the recent ECJ judgments in the cases Egenberger and IR on religious discrimination.


Andrzej Marian Świątkowski
Andrzej Marian Świątkowski, is a Jean Monet Professor of European Labour Law and Social Security, Jesuit University Ignatianum, Krakow, Poland and a member of the EELC Academic Board.
Article

Access_open Joinder of Non-Consenting Parties: The Singapore International Commercial Court Approach Meets Transnational Recognition and Enforcement

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international commercial courts, international business courts, third parties, third party joinder, recognition and enforcement
Auteurs Drossos Stamboulakis en Blake Crook
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article we explore the approach of the Singapore International Commercial Court (the ‘SICC’) to jurisdiction and joinder of non-consenting parties, and way that any resulting judgments are likely to be treated by foreign enforcing courts. This novel juncture arises as international commercial courts, such as the SICC, rely predominantly upon party autonomy to enliven their jurisdiction over disputants. This does not require any territorial link of the parties or the dispute to the host jurisdiction (Singapore). At the same time, however, the SICC is granted a mandate under Singaporean law to join non-consenting parties, again with no necessary territorial link. Where such joinder occurs, any resulting judgment is likely to face significant difficulties if recognition and enforcement is sought outside of Singapore. To support this argument, we first set out the ways in which non-consenting disputants may be joined to proceedings before the SICC, and offer some initial thoughts on how these powers are likely to be exercised. Second, we argue that any such exercise of jurisdiction – that lacks either territorial or consent-based jurisdiction grounds – is unlikely to gain support internationally, by reference to transnational recognition and enforcement approaches, and the SICC’s most likely recognition and enforcement destinations. Finally, we offer some concluding remarks about the utility of international commercial court proceedings against non-consenting parties, including the possibility they may impact on domestic recognition and enforcement approaches in foreign States.


Drossos Stamboulakis
B.Com, LLB (Hons) (Monash); LLM (EMLE); Law Lecturer, USC School of Law (University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia)

Blake Crook
PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law (University of Melbourne, Australia), B.Com (Acc), LLB (Hons) (Sunshine Coast).
Article

Access_open The Court of the Astana International Financial Center in the Wake of Its Predecessors

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international financial centers, offshore courts, international business courts, Kazakhstan
Auteurs Nicolás Zambrana-Tévar
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Court of the Astana International Financial Center is a new dispute resolution initiative meant to attract investors in much the same way as it has been done in the case of the courts and arbitration mechanisms of similar financial centers in the Persian Gulf. This paper examines such initiatives from a comparative perspective, focusing on their Private International Law aspects such as jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition and enforcement of judgments and arbitration awards. The paper concludes that their success, especially in the case of the younger courts, will depend on the ability to build harmonious relationships with the domestic courts of each host country.


Nicolás Zambrana-Tévar
LLM (LSE), PhD (Navarra), KIMEP University.
Article

Access_open The Emergence of International Commercial Courts in India: A Narrative for Ease of Doing Business?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Commercial contracts, Enforcement, Jurisdiction, Specialized courts, India
Auteurs Sai Ramani Garimella en M.Z. Ashraful
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The liberal globalised order has brought increased focus on the regulation of international commerce, and especially dispute resolution. Enforcement of contracts has been a concern largely owing to the insufficiencies of the legal systems, especially relating to the institutional structure, and it holds true for India as well. The commercial courts mechanism – international and domestic – with innovative features aimed at providing expedited justice is witnessing much traction. India, similar to many other jurisdictions, legislated in favour of specialized dispute resolution mechanisms for commercial disputes that could help improve the procedures for enforcement of contracts. This research attempts to critique the comparable strengths and the reform spaces within the Indian legislation on commercial courts. It parses the status of commercial dispute resolution in India especially in the context of cross-border contracts and critiques India’s attempt to have specialised courts to address commercial dispute resolution.


Sai Ramani Garimella
Sai Ramani Garimella, PhD, is assistant professor of the faculty of legal studies at the South Asian University in New Delhi.

M.Z. Ashraful
M.Z. Ashraful is the research student at South Asian University in New Delhi.
Case Reports

2019/20 How to interpret the Posting of Workers Directive in the cross-border road transport sector? Dutch Supreme Court asks the ECJ for guidance (NL)

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden Private International Law, Posting of Workers and Expatriates, Applicable Law
Auteurs Zef Even en Amber Zwanenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this transnational road transport case, the Dutch Supreme Court had to elaborate on the ECJ Koelzsch and Schlecker cases and asks for guidance from the ECJ on the applicability and interpretation of the Posting of Workers Directive.


Zef Even
Zef Even is a lawyer with SteensmaEven, www.steensmaeven.com, and professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Amber Zwanenburg
Amber Zwanenburg is a lecturer and PhD Candidate at the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    In 2016 the Dutch Government Commission of Reassessment of Parenthood (GCRP) proposed a wide array of legal changes to Family Law, e.g. with regard to legal multi-parenthood and legal multiple parental responsibility. Although the commission researched these matters thoroughly in its quest towards proposing new directions in the field of Family Law, multi-parents themselves were not interviewed by the commission. Therefore, this article aims to explore a possible gap between the social experiences of parents and the recommendations of the GCRP. Data was drawn from in depth-interviews with a sample of 25 parents in plus-two-parent constellations living in Belgium and the Netherlands. For the most part the social experiences of parents aligned with the ways in which the GCRP plans to legally accommodate the former. However, my data tentatively suggests that other (legal) recommendations of the GCRP need to be explored more in depth.
    ---
    In 2016 stelde de Nederlandse Staatscommissie Herijking ouderschap voor om een wettelijk kader te creëren voor meerouderschap en meeroudergezag. Ondanks de grondigheid van het gevoerde onderzoek ontbraken er gegevens omtrent de ervaringen van de meerouders zelf. Dit artikel levert een bijdrage in het vullen van deze leemte door inzage te geven in de (juridische) ervaringen van 25 ouders in meerouderschapsconstellaties in België en Nederland.


Nola Cammu MA
Nola Cammu is PhD Candidate at the Law Faculty of the University of Antwerp.
Artikel

Access_open Succession Mediation in Europe

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden succession mediation, cross-border mediation, Research, Mediation Directive, Succession Regulation
Auteurs Judith Pfützenreuter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The two years FOMENTO project ‘Fostering Mediation in cross-border civil and succession matters’ aims to contribute to conflict prevention in cross-border succession matters. To reach a deeper understanding and impulses for a correct implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC (Mediation Directive) and of Regulation (EU) No. 650/2012 (Succession Regulation) the effects of both regulations have been analyzed in a research study. To this end, country reports about the implementation of the Succession Regulation and the Mediation Directive in six European countries (Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden) have been assembled and 105 expert interviews with lawyers, notaries, judges and mediators have been conducted and analyzed.
    This article gives a general overview about the outcomes of the research study and focuses on the analysis of the expert interviews. The experts gave answers about the concrete advantages, challenges and suggestions for improving mediation in cross-border succession conflicts and the effects of the European Succession Regulation.


Judith Pfützenreuter
Judith Pfützenreuter is Member of EU-Project FOMENTO (Fostering mediation in cross-border civil and succession matters).
Law Review

2019/1 EELC’s review of the year 2018

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2019
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Filip Dorssemont e.a.
Samenvatting

    For the second time, various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Catherine Barnard

Filip Dorssemont

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Francesca Maffei

Niklas Bruun

Anthony Kerr

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Daiva Petrylaite

Andrej Poruban

Stein Evju

    Alternative/amicable dispute resolution (ADR) is omnipresent these days. In line with global evolutions, the Belgian legislator embraced the use of these ADR mechanisms. Recent reforms of the law, first in 2013 with the act concerning the introduction of a Family and Juvenile Court and consecutively in 2018 with the act containing diverse provisions regarding civil law with a view to the promotion of alternative forms of conflict resolution, implemented more far-reaching measures to promote ADR than ever before. The ultimate goal seems to alter our society’s way of conflict resolution and make the court the ultimum remedium in case all other options failed.In that respect, the legislator took multiple initiatives to stimulate amicable dispute resolution. The reform of 2013 focused solely on family cases, the one in 2018 was broader and designed for all civil cases. The legal tools consist firstly of an information provision regarding ADR for the family judge’s clerk, lawyers and bailiffs. The judges can hear parties about prior initiatives they took to resolve their conflict amicably and assess whether amicable solutions can still be considered, as well as explain these types of solutions and adjourn the case for a short period to investigate the possibilities of amicable conflict resolution. A legal framework has been created for a new method, namely collaborative law and the law also regulates the link between a judicial procedure and the methods of mediation and collaborative law to facilitate the transition between these procedures. Finally, within the Family Courts, specific ‘Chambers of Amicable Settlement’ were created, which framework is investigated more closely in this article. All of these legal tools are further discussed and assessed on their strengths and weaknesses.
    ---
    Alternatieve of minnelijke conflictoplossing is alomtegenwoordig. De Belgische wetgever heeft het gebruik van deze minnelijke oplossingsmethodes omarmd, in navolging van wereldwijde evoluties. Recente wetshervormingen implementeerden maatregelen ter promotie van minnelijke conflictoplossing die verder reiken dan ooit tevoren. Het betreft vooreerst de hervorming in 2013 met de wet betreffende de invoering van een familie- en jeugdrechtbank en vervolgens kwam er in 2018 de wet houdende diverse bepalingen inzake burgerlijk recht en bepalingen met het oog op de bevordering van alternatieve vormen van geschillenoplossing. De ultieme doelstelling van deze hervormingen is een mentaliteitswijziging omtrent onze wijze van conflictoplossing teweegbrengen, waarbij de rechtbank het ultimum remedium dient te worden nadat alle overige opties faalden.De wetshervorming van 2013 focuste uitsluitend op familiale materies, de hervorming van 2018 was ruimer en had alle burgerlijke zaken voor ogen. De wettelijke mogelijkheden bestaan vooreerst uit een informatieverstrekking omtrent minnelijke conflictoplossing in hoofde van de griffier van de familierechtbank, advocaten en gerechtsdeurwaarders. Rechters kunnen partijen horen omtrent eerdere ondernomen initiatieven om hun conflict op een minnelijke manier op te lossen, zij beoordelen of minnelijke oplossingen alsnog kunnen worden overwogen, zij kunnen de diverse minnelijke mogelijkheden toelichten aan partijen alsook de zaak voor een korte periode uitstellen om partijen toe te laten de mogelijkheden aan minnelijke conflictoplossing te verkennen. Er werd voorts een wetgevend kader uitgewerkt voor een nieuwe oplossingsmethode, namelijk de collaboratieve onderhandeling. De wet creëert tevens een link tussen een gerechtelijke procedure en de methodes van bemiddeling en collaboratieve onderhandeling, om de overgang tussen deze procedures te vereenvoudigen. Tot slot werden er binnen de familierechtbanken specifieke kamers voor minnelijke schikking opgericht, waarvan het wetgevend kader in detail wordt bestudeerd in dit artikel. Al deze wettelijke opties worden nader besproken en beoordeeld aan de hand van hun sterktes en zwaktes.


Sofie Raes
Sofie Raes is a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute for Family Law of the University of Ghent, where she researches alternative dispute resolution, with a focus on the chambers of amicable settlement in Family Courts. She is also an accredited mediator in family cases.
Artikel

An Introduction to the Singapore Convention on Mediation – Perspectives from Singapore

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2018
Trefwoorden Singapore Convention, Dispute resolution, Uncitral, Enforcement
Auteurs Nadja Alexander en Shouyu Chong
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Following a retrospective of the road towards the Convention, incorporating some Singaporean inside views, the authors provide a detailed analysis of the envisaged grounds for refusal of mediated settlements. The authors also highlight various issues around the very concept, and proof, of mediation. These issues are fundamental, as only settlements ensuing from mediation are covered. Another significant aspect is the absence of any provisions pertaining to the status of agreements to mediate, the contract situated at the entry side of mediation.


Nadja Alexander
Nadja Alexander is Professor of Law (Practice) at Singapore Management University School of Law and Director of the Singapore International Dispute Resolution Academy (‘SIDRA’). She may be contacted at nadjaa@smu.edu.sg.

Shouyu Chong
Shouyu Chong is a Researcher at SIDRA, and may be contacted at sychong.2013@smu.edu.sg.

    This paper starts by reviewing empirical research that threatens law and economics’ initial success. This research has demonstrated that the functioning of the law cannot be well understood based on the assumption of the rational actor and that policies which are based on this assumption are likely to be flawed. Subsequently, three responses to this criticism are discussed. Whereas the first response denounces this criticism by maintaining that the limitations attributed to the rational actor can easily be incorporated in rational choice theory, the second response welcomes the criticism as an opportunity to come up with an integrative theory of law and behavior. The third response also takes the criticism seriously but replaces the aspiration to come up with such an integrative theory by a context-sensitive approach. It will be argued that the first two responses fall short while the third response offers a promising way to go forward.


Peter Mascini
Prof. dr. P. Mascini, Erasmus School of Law and Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    With a Belgian law of June, 18 2018, the principle of the voluntary nature of mediation was affected. A lot of critical comments can be made at this point. The scope of the obligation is not clear. Mandatory mediation raises the threshold to the court and has as effect that many cases are not handled in the most appropriate way. The bar doesn’t support the measure. Research is needed to find out if the new measure is justified.


Tom Wijnant
Tom Wijnant is assistent en doctoraatsonderzoeker aan de UGent. Zijn onderzoek legt de nadruk op de optimalisering van bemiddeling in België, met een focus op de faciliterende rol van de advocatuur.
Artikel

Access_open De Belgische evenwichtsoefening inzake de verplichte ADR-poging in het raam van een gerechtelijke procedure

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden mandatory mediation, access tot justice, Belgian Council of State, ADR legislation june 18 2018
Auteurs Eric Lancksweerdt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution examines how, when establishing the new Belgian legislation on the promotion of ADR, a delicate balance was sought between proponents and opponents of mandatory mediation. The Belgian government was in favour of compulsory mediation, but the Council of State, the High Council of Justice, members of parliament from the majority and the opposition, and representatives of professional organizations were opposed to it. A delicate compromise was found whereby the judge can impose a mediation, but if both sides are opposed to it, a mandatory mediation attempt is excluded.


Eric Lancksweerdt
Eric Lancksweerdt is hoofddocent aan de UHasselt en praktijkassistent aan de UAntwerpen. Zijn onderzoeksdomeinen zijn alternatieve conflictoplossing, burgerparticipatie, rechtspraktijk en ethiek, menselijke kwaliteiten in een juridische context.

    Recently, a new law with articles concerning mandatory mediation was approved in Belgium. From January 1st, 2019, the judge will be able to refer parties to mediation on a mandatory basis. This article considers if mandatory mediation is a realistic and feasible track in Belgium, focusing on the evolution of alternative dispute resolution in Belgium and in the European Union. The first part will define mediation in Belgium, followed by an analysis of the articles concerning mandatory mediation of the newly passed law. The article will also have a gander at Belgian legal developments to see which initiatives have already been taken towards mandatory dispute resolution. To conclude, an assessment is made if mandatory mediation is a realistic and feasible track in light of the existing evolutions of ADR in Belgium.


Céline Jaspers
Céline Jaspers is doctoraatsbursaal aan de UHasselt. Voordien was zij advocaat-stagiair. Zij behaalde een LLM ‘Dispute Resolution’ aan Pepperdine University. Momenteel bereidt zij een proefschrift voor over ‘De verplichte ADR-poging in scheidingssituaties’.
Artikel

Promoting Conciliation and Mediation in Collective Labour Conflicts in Europe

Celebrating 50 years of Federal Mediation Services in Belgium

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Mediation, conciliation, collective labour conflict, strikes
Auteurs Ana Belén García, Erica Pender, Francisco J. Medina e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    On 23 April 2018, the Belgian Ministry of Labour, together with a consortium of 12 European research institutes, held a symposium on the current state of the art and best practices for conciliation and mediation in collective labour conflicts within the European Union, and particularly in Belgium. The symposium was organized for two occasions. First, the 50st anniversary of the Belgium law, providing mediation services by the Ministry of Labour to prevent and mediate in collective labour conflicts. Second, the presentation of the results of an EU (DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion) sponsored project in 12 EU member states.
    The management of collective labour conflicts is in all countries regulated differently. The study shows that also practices of third party intervention differ largely. Most countries differentiate conciliation (a relative informal process of facilitated negotiation), mediation (usually defined as a strong involvement of the third party, who gives recommendations to the parties), and arbitration. Mediators typically are not trained, certified or registered as mediators in most countries. In all countries there is a large potential for conciliation, particularly in early stages of conflict (preventive mediation), as well as in rebuilding of trust after conflict episodes. More details in open access book: Mediation in collective labor conflicts (Springer, 2018).


Ana Belén García
Ana Belén García is senior researcher at the University of Seville and KU Leuven, working in the departments of work and organizational psychology. She was coordinator of several EU funded research programs on social dialogue in organisations. The most recent project was on mediation in collective labor conflicts in 12 EU member states. Ana’s interest is on conflict management and mediation in organizations. She was editor of two handbooks in the Springer Series ‘Industrial relations and conflict management’. Ana holds a PhD in Psychology and HRM from the University of Seville and KU Leuven. She is also a registered mediator.

Erica Pender
Erica Pender is a mediator and senior researcher at the University of Seville and KU Leuven in the department of Work and Organizational Psychology. She holds a PhD in Psychology from the University of Seville and KU Leuven focusing on trust and trustworthiness in organizations. After studying psychology at the University of Seville, she obtained her MSc at Maastricht University. She has coordinated two large-scale projects for the European Commission, and was co-editor of two handbooks in the Springer Series ‘Industrial relations and conflict management’.

Francisco J. Medina
Fransisco J. Medina is professor in social and organizational psychology, and Dean of the Faculty of Psychology and Educational sciences, at the University of Seville, Spain. His interests are conflict management, mediation and organizational development. He is engaged for many years in the development of labor mediation in Spain, providing training for mediators. He is also an experienced consultant and mediator. Francisco published both internationally and in Spanish extensively on conflict management and mediation.

Martin Euwema
Martin Euwema is professor in organizational psychology, and chair of the research group Organizational and Occupational Psychology and Professional Learning at KU Leuven, Belgium. He is also co-director of the Leuven Center for Collaborative Management and visiting professor at University of Copenhagen, IESEG-Paris, Sevilla, and Tsinghua (Beijing). He has extensive experience as consultant and mediator for both profit and non-profit organizations. His fields of expertise are conflict management, mediation, leadership, and organizational and team development.
Toont 1 - 20 van 80 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4
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.