Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 437 artikelen

x
Artikel

Access_open De relatie tussen een vloeibaar geweten en een stabiele identiteit

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden juvenile delinquency, shame, empathy, moral development
Auteurs Frans Schalkwijk
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Every human being strives for the experience of a stable identity over time. In order to achieve this, the conscience constantly evaluates whether our self-esteem at a given moment fits that identity. When our self-esteem rises we experience pride, but when it falls we experience guilt or shame. Many of these evaluations are based on the ability to be empathetic, because empathy allows you to estimate how you relate to the other person. Another source of evaluation is being aware of values, norms and rules. In pro Justitia reports on delinquent young people, diagnosis of conscience is an important point of attention. How does the offense fit with his identity and what does it do with his self-esteem? To gain insight into this, the diagnostician focuses his attention on several areas of the young person’s life. Assuming the alleged ethnic-cultural specificity of criminal behavior is a pitfall that should be avoided.


Frans Schalkwijk
Prof. dr. F. Schalkwijk is bijzonder hoogleraar gewetensontwikkeling en psychotherapeut/psychoanalyticus.
Artikel

Het perspectief van de expert en de diagnostiek van het geweten

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden clinical diagnostics, delinquency, qualitative methods, forensic psychology, adolescents
Auteurs Julia Tiemersma
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The GGD report states that 99% of the Top 600 juvenile offenders have a lacunar conscience. But what is conscience from a clinical perspective, what type of information does the clinician or rapporteur gather and how is it described? The department of forensic ortho-pedagogy of the University of Amsterdam is developing an instrument with which behavioral scientists can make a descriptive diagnosis of the conscience in a structured manner. For the construction of the instrument the experiential knowledge of Dutch clinical experts in the field of conscience is collected. By means of qualitative research methods, a number of domains and methods were identified that are considered important for the diagnostics of conscience. Based on the current study and state-of-the-art scientific literature, a clinical structured judgment instrument is realized in which the clinician is describing the domains of empathy, self-aware emotions such as shame and guilt, and moral development a form a strength-weakness analysis of the conscience.


Julia Tiemersma
J. Tiemersma MSc is GZ-psycholoog, en in opleiding tot klinisch psycholoog.
Artikel

Over empathie en disruptieve gedragsstoornissen

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden empathy-related responses, ODD, CD, psychopathic traits, adolescents
Auteurs Minet de Wied
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Children and adolescents with disruptive behavior disorders, including oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) or conduct disorder (CD), are known to show little compassion and empathy for others’ suffering, particularly those with callous-unemotional (psychopathic) traits. This contribution addresses the question of what we know about the nature and causes of empathy problems in youth with disruptive behavior disorders, and whether the problems are different among subtypes. The heterogeneity of disruptive behavior disorders is discussed, the complexity of the empathy process, and research on empathy deficits in children and adolescents with ODD/CD. To sum up, (1) it is proposed that different mechanisms may underlie empathy problems seen in children and adolescents with ODD/CD, with or without psychopathic traits, (2) the strength of the empathy response depends in part on stimulus characteristics, also for those with psychopathic traits, and (3) it is advised to use a multimethod approach to depict the empathy process at different levels of human functioning.


Minet de Wied
Dr. M. de Wied is verbonden aan de opleiding Pedagogische wetenschappen en de Onderzoeksgroep Jeugd en Gezin van de faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij doet onderzoek naar de ontwikkeling van empathie, in het bijzonder naar empathiestoornissen bij kinderen en adolescenten met disruptieve gedragsstoornissen.
Artikel

De effectiviteit van morele gedragsinterventies bij jeugdige delinquenten

Een overzichtsstudie

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 1 2022
Trefwoorden moral development, behavioral interventions, conscience, meta-analysis
Auteurs Evelyn Heynen, Eveline van Vugt, Mark Assink e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Juvenile delinquents appear to be delayed in their moral development, more specific the development of their moral judgment, empathy, guilt and shame. Moral development also appears to predict recidivism. It is therefore plausible that interventions that focus on the moral development of juvenile delinquents could have a beneficial effect on reducing recidivism. However, our systematic review (i.e., meta-analysis) shows that with these so-called moral behavioral interventions the level of moral judgment of juvenile offenders can be significantly increased, by 22%, but that such interventions have no effect on recidivism. It may be possible to increase the effectiveness of moral interventions for juvenile delinquents by simultaneously influencing several aspects of moral development instead of, for example, only moral judgment or empathy. In addition, problems of poor aggression regulation, often caused by a history of traumatic events, may need to be addressed first before moral-behavioral interventions can be effective.


Evelyn Heynen
Dr. E.J.E. Heynen is universitair docent klinische kinder- en jeugd psychologie aan de Open Universiteit, Faculteit der Psychologie.

Eveline van Vugt
Dr. E.S. van Vugt is universitair docent forensische orthopedagogiek aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Faculteit der Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen.

Mark Assink
Dr. M. Assink is universitair docent forensische orthopedagogiek aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Faculteit der Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen.

Geert-Jan Stams
Prof. dr. G.J.J.M. Stams is hoogleraar forensische orthopedagogiek aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Faculteit der Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen.
Artikel

Access_open On Identifying Assumptions Underlying Legal Arrangements

Some Conceptual and Methodological Considerations

Tijdschrift Law and Method, mei 2022
Trefwoorden (Legislative) assumptions, legal arrangements, inference to the best explanation, theory-driven evaluations
Auteurs Frans L. Leeuw en Antonia M. Waltermann
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Legal arrangements rest on behavioural, cognitive, social, and other assumptions regarding their role and function in society and the legal system. The identification and subsequent evaluation of these assumptions is an important task for legal scholarship. In this article, we focus on the identification and categorisation of these assumptions, providing conceptual distinctions and methodological guidance. We distinguish between assumptions about the value(s), norm(s), or interest(s) underlying a legal arrangement, which can be legal or non-legal, and assumptions about the relationship between the legal arrangement and its underlying value(s), norm(s), or interest(s), which can be logical, causal, or contributory. Regarding the identification, we consider explicit references and inference to the best explanation and theory-driven evaluations as possible methods. Inference to the best explanation, we posit, functions as a manner of reconstructing the theory that the person(s) creating a legal arrangement had in mind regarding the place and function of that legal arrangement in society. Given this, we offer a step-by-step approach to reconstructing this theory in use, drawing from theory-driven evaluations and its sources in the social sciences. These distinctions and guidelines can contribute to understanding the context and untangling the complexities involved in identifying the assumptions that underlie legal arrangements.


Frans L. Leeuw
Prof. dr. Frans Leeuw, Professor emeritus, Law, Public Policy and Social Science Research, Department of Foundations and Methods of Law, Maastricht University.

Antonia M. Waltermann
Dr. Antonia Waltermann, Assistant Professor of Legal Theory, Department of Foundations and Methods of Law, Maastricht University.
Artikel

Access_open The Development of Moral Reasoning in the Law Curriculum - An Exploration of Various Teaching Activities

Special issue on Education in (Professional) Legal Ethics, Emanuel van Dongen & Jet Tigchelaar (eds.)

Tijdschrift Law and Method, maart 2022
Trefwoorden moral reasoning, legal education, scholarship of teaching and learning, defining issues test
Auteurs Emanuel van Dongen en Steven Raaijmakers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Developing the capacity for moral judgment is an essential professional competence for lawyers. What teaching and learning activities in the law curriculum can be used in order to contribute to students’ moral reasoning and moral judgment? Four teaching methods were tried out in the period 2019 to 2021 at the Utrecht University School of Law: teaching methods that either work with (hypothetical) dilemmas (I); in-class reflection papers (II); experiential learning based on own experiences in a simulation situation (III); or clinical teaching in a real law firm (IV). The effects of these methods on the development of moral reasoning were measured using the Defining Issues Test (DIT). Additional information on the effectiveness and utility of the method was gathered using semi-structured interviews with teachers. The DIT results were compared at the beginning and at the end of the courses and related to the teaching methods. This article presents the outcomes of this study and formulates some recommendations for further research on the topic.


Emanuel van Dongen
Dr. Emanuel van Dongen is Associated Professor Private Law at the Molengraaff Institute for Private Law, researcher at the Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law and the Montaigne Centre for Rule of Law and Administration of Justice, Utrecht School of Law.

Steven Raaijmakers
Dr. Steven Raaijmakers is an educational consultant with Educational Consultancy & Professional Development, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Utrecht University.
Artikel

Access_open Naar een werkbaar en realistisch model voor stakeholder governance en de rol van aandeelhouders daarin

Oratie van prof. mr. B. Kemp

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Ondernemingsrecht, Aflevering 1-2 2022
Trefwoorden bestuur, vennootschappelijk belang, bevoegdheidsverdeling, Rijnlands model, algemene vergadering
Auteurs Prof. mr. B. Kemp
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In zijn oratie gaat Kemp in op de spanning die binnen de vennootschap bestaat tussen de vennootschapsleiding die het belang van de vennootschap moet behartigen en de aandeelhouders die – volgens de heersende leer – hun eigen belang mogen behartigen. Mede op grond van rechtseconomische gedachten doet hij een aanzet tot hoe de bevoegdheidsverdeling binnen de vennootschap verder kan worden vormgegeven.


Prof. mr. B. Kemp
Prof. mr. B. Kemp is advocaat te Amsterdam en hoogleraar Corporate Governance and Corporate Regulation aan Maastricht University.
Artikel

Access_open Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part II: The Purposes of Including Legal Philosophy

Tijdschrift Law and Method, januari 2022
Trefwoorden legal philosophy, research methods, interdisciplinary research, conceptual analysis
Auteurs Sanne Taekema en Wibren van der Burg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Many doctrinal legal research questions require making use of other academic disciplines or perspectives. This article explains the relevance of legal philosophy for doctrinal research projects. Often legal research questions have conceptual or evaluative dimensions that presuppose philosophical understanding. For research on the concept of democracy, the function of constitutional rights, or the possible introduction of a referendum in the Netherlands, questions of a philosophical nature need to be answered. Legal philosophy can supplement and enrich doctrinal research in various ways. In this article, we present seven purposes that legal philosophy may serve in the context of a doctrinal research project: conceptual clarification, exposition and reconstruction of fundamental normative principles and values, theory building, providing creative perspectives, structural critiques, evaluation, and recommendations. For each objective, we illustrate how to use relevant philosophical methods. Thus, this article complements our earlier publication ‘Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part I: Introducing Three Philosophical Methods’.1x http://www.lawandmethod.nl/tijdschrift/lawandmethod/2020/01/lawandmethod-D-19-00006.

Noten

  • * This text has been presented to classes at the University of Zagreb, Queen Mary University of London and Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam; we profited from the feedback of our students. We also want to thank Irma Bluijs, Machteld Geuskens, Tamar de Waal and the reviewers for their helpful comments on previous versions of this article, and Jacqueline Brand and Robert Poll for providing research assistance.
  • 1 http://www.lawandmethod.nl/tijdschrift/lawandmethod/2020/01/lawandmethod-D-19-00006.


Sanne Taekema
Prof. mr. dr. Sanne Taekema is Professor of Jurisprudence, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.

Wibren van der Burg
Prof. dr. mr. Wibren van der Burg, is Professor of Legal Philosophy, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Artikel

Kanttekeningen bij een instrumentele waar­dering van procedurele rechtvaardigheid

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden Procedural justice, Empirical-legal research, Fact-value distinction, Consequentialism, Deontology
Auteurs Vincent Geeraets
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Procedural justice has been at the forefront of empirical legal research in the Netherlands in past years. One of the major goals of this research is to find out what the effects are of the perception of procedural justice. In this article, I argue that the notion of procedural justice is deontological in nature. It has an intrinsic value, which means that it cannot be weighed against other interests. This is recognized in law: people have a right to a fair trial. However, since in social scientific research the focus is on the effects of procedural justice, researchers treat this concept (also) as a consequentialist notion. It is thought of as a means which can serve some useful end. My aim is to assess whether this way of valuing procedural justice can be considered acceptable. An important upshot of my discussion is that conducting research into procedural justice implies a normative stance. Finally, I suggest ways in which an all too instrumental approach to procedural justice can be avoided.


Vincent Geeraets
Vincent Geeraets is als universitair docent verbonden aan de afdeling Rechtstheorie en rechtsgeschiedenis van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Hij is gepromoveerd in de rechtsfilosofie en houdt zich onder andere bezig met het thema feiten en normen in empirisch-juridisch onderzoek.
Artikel

Access_open Detentie en autonomie

Over de psychologische basis van vrijwillig handelen en ­zelfredzaamheid

Tijdschrift PROCES, Aflevering 6 2021
Trefwoorden Detentie, Autonomie, Zelfredzaamheid, Sense of agency
Auteurs Josi Driessen, Renske Potgieter, Anja Dirkzwager e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Life in prison goes hand in hand with far-reaching restrictions in the personal autonomy of offenders. Lack of personal autonomy and the coercion to perform certain actions disrupt the ‘normal’ intrinsic experiences of voluntary action (i.e. sense of agency). Disturbances in the neurocognitive basis of voluntary action have a number of clear effects on human functioning, including self-reliance. This paper provides a first analysis of the relationship between personal autonomy and the intrinsic experience of voluntary action, and how this may be the key to understanding how freedom restrictions in detention can reduce self-reliance.


Josi Driessen
Dr. J.M.A. Driessen is onderzoeker (postdoc) bij de afdeling Social Health & Organisational Psychology aan de Universiteit Utrecht.

Renske Potgieter
R.H. Potgieter, MSc is projectsecretaris bij het RIEC Amsterdam-Amstelland.

Anja Dirkzwager
Dr. A.J.E. Dirkzwager is senior onderzoeker bij het Nederlands Studiecentrum voor Criminaliteit en Rechtshandhaving.

Joke Harte
Prof. dr. J.M. Harte is hoogleraar bij de afdeling Strafrecht en Criminologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam en lid van de redactie van PROCES.

Henk Aarts
Prof. dr. H. Aarts is hoogleraar bij de afdeling Social Health & Organisational Psychology van de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Access_open Global Solidarity and Collective Intelligence in Times of Pandemics

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Global solidarity, Pandemics, Global Existential Threats, Collective Intelligence, CrowdLaw
Auteurs José Luis Martí
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Some of the existential threats we currently face are global in the sense that they affect us all, and thus matter of global concern and trigger duties of moral global solidarity. But some of these global threats, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, are global in a second, additional, sense: discharging them requires joint, coordinated global action. For that reason, these twofold global threats trigger political – not merely moral – duties of global solidarity. This article explores the contrast between these two types of global threats with the purpose of clarifying the distinction between moral and political duties of global solidarity. And, in the absence of a fully developed global democratic institutional system, the article also explores some promising ways to fulfill our global political duties, especially those based on mechanisms of collective intelligence such as CrowdLaw, which might provide effective solutions to these global threats while enhancing the democratic legitimacy of public decision-making.


José Luis Martí
José Luis Martí is Associate Professor of Legal and Political Philosophy, Department of Law, Pompeu Fabra University of Barcelona.
Redactioneel

Access_open Solidarity and COVID-19: An Introduction

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Auteurs Wouter Veraart, Lukas van den Berge en Antony Duff
Auteursinformatie

Wouter Veraart
Wouter Veraart is Professor of Legal Philosophy at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Lukas van den Berge
Lukas van den Berge is Assistant Professor of Legal Theory at Utrecht University.

Antony Duff
Antony Duff is Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Stirling and Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota.
Artikel

Access_open The Exceptionality of Solidarity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Solidarity, COVID-19, Crisis, Normalcy, Exceptionality
Auteurs Amalia Amaya Navarro
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In times of crisis, we witness exceptional expressions of solidarity. Why does solidarity spring in times of crisis when it wanes in normal times? An inquiry into what may explain the differences between the expression of solidarity in crisis vs. normalcy provides, as I will argue in this article, important insights into the conditions and nature of solidarity. Solidarity requires, I will contend, an egalitarian ethos and state action within and beyond the state. It is neither a momentary political ideal, nor an exclusionary one, which depends for its sustainment on formal, legal, structures. Transient, sectarian, and informal conceptions of solidarity unduly curtail the demands of solidarity by restricting its reach to times of crisis, to in-group recipients, and to the social rather than the legal sphere. The article concludes by discussing some aspects of the dynamics of solidarity and its inherent risks that the analysis of the exceptionality of solidarity helps bring into focus.


Amalia Amaya Navarro
Amalia Amaya Navarro is British Academy Global Professor of Legal Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
Artikel

Access_open Populism, the Kingdom of Shadows, and the Challenge to Liberal Democracy

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Populism, Liberal democracy, Political representation, Société du spectacle, Theatrocracy
Auteurs Massimo La Torre
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Populism is a somehow intractable notion, since its reference is much too wide, comprising phenomena that are indeed in conflict between them, and moreover blurred, by being often used in an instrumental, polemical way. Such intractability is then radicalized through the two alternative approaches to populism, one that is more or less neutral, rooting in the political science tradition, and a second one, fully normative, though fed by political realism, founding as it does on a specific political theory and project. In the article an alternative view is proposed, that of populism as the politics that is congruent with the increasing role played by ‘screens’, icons, and images in social relationships and indeed in political representation. In this way populism is approached as the specific way politics is done within the context of a digitalized société du spectacle.


Massimo La Torre
Massimo La Torre is Professor of Philosophy of Law, ‘Magna Graecia’ University of Catanzaro, Italy, and Visiting Professor of European Law, University of Tallinn, Estonia.
Artikel

Access_open Living with Others in Pandemics

The State’s Duty to Protect, Individual Responsibility and Solidarity

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, The state’s duty to protect, Duty to rescue, Responsibility, Solidarity
Auteurs Konstantinos A Papageorgiou
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The article discusses a range of important normative questions raised by anti-COVID-19 measures and policies. Do governments have the right to impose such severe restrictions on individual freedom and furthermore do citizens have obligations vis-à-vis the state, others and themselves to accept such restrictions? I will argue that a democratic state may legitimately enforce publicly discussed, properly enacted and constitutionally tested laws and policies in order to protect its citizens from risks to life and limb. Even so, there is a natural limit, factual and normative, to what the state or a government can do in this respect. Citizens will also need to take it upon themselves not to harm and to protect others and in the context of a pandemic this means that endorsement of restrictions or other mandatory measures, notably vaccination, is not to be seen as a matter of personal preference concerning the supposedly inviolable sovereignty of one’s own body.


Konstantinos A Papageorgiou
Konstantinos A Papageorgiou is Professor of the Philosophy of Law at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Law.
Artikel

Access_open Solidarity and COVID-19

A Foucauldian analysis

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Solidarity, COVID-19 epidemic, Foucault, Social cohesion, Practicing
Auteurs Marli Huijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, most governments in Europe have imposed disciplinary and controlling mechanisms on their populations. In the name of solidarity, citizens are pressed to submit to lockdowns, social distancing or corona apps. Building on the historical-philosophical studies of Michel Foucault, this article shows that these mechanisms are spin-offs of health regimes that have evolved since the seventeenth century. In case of COVID-19, these regimes decreased the infection, morbidity and mortality rates. But, as a side-effect, they limited the opportunities to act together and practice solidarity. This negatively affected the social cohesion and public sphere in already highly individualistic societies. To prevent the further disappearing of solidarity – understood as something that is enacted rather than as a moral value or political principle – governments and citizens need to invest in the restoral of the social conditions that enable and facilitate the practicing of solidarity after the epidemic.


Marli Huijer
Marli Huijer is Emeritus Professor of Public Philosophy at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Sick and Blamed

Criminal Law in the Chilean Response to COVID-19

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2021
Trefwoorden Solidarity, Punishment, Legitimacy, Inequality, COVID-19
Auteurs Rocío Lorca
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Chilean government called upon ideas of social solidarity to fight the pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 and it relied heavily on the criminal law in order to secure compliance with sanitary restrictions. However, because restrictions and prosecutorial policy did not take into account social background and people’s ability to comply with the law, prosecutions soon created groups of people who were being both over-exposed to disease and death, and over-exposed to control, blame and punishment. The configuration of this overpoliced and underprotected group became so visibly unjust that appealing to social solidarity to justify the criminal enforcement of sanitary restrictions became almost insulting. This forced the Fiscal Nacional to develop a ‘socially sensitive’ prosecutorial strategy, something that we have not often seen despite Chile’s inequalities. The changes in policy by the Fiscal Nacional suggest that perhaps, at times, penal institutions can be made accountable for acting in ways that create estrangement rather than cohesion.


Rocío Lorca
Rocío Lorca is Assistant Professor at Universidad de Chile’s School of Law.
Article

Access_open Ruled by Fear or Safety-Related Empowerment

The Experience and Meaning of Penal Protection Orders in Intimate Partner Violence in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2021
Trefwoorden intimate partner violence, stalking, protection orders, empowerment, safety, well-being
Auteurs Irma W.M. Cleven
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This study uses a novel approach to understand the experience and meaning of unsafety and the contribution of penal protection orders to victim empowerment in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV). In ten in-depth interviews, IPV survivors reflect on their relationship with their ex-partner and the previous years in which the order against their ex-partner was issued, including its role within the wider process of coming to terms with IPV victimisation and moving on. Depending on expectations of protection orders (POs) enforcement and deterrence, POs enhance one’s safety-related self-efficacy and result in a sense of empowerment. Its meaning can be understood in terms of one’s power from the ex-partner, power to act, status vis-à-vis the offender and the wider community, care/help of the CJS, and unity/togetherness with the wider community. Several implications for theoretical and empirical research and practice are discussed.


Irma W.M. Cleven
Irma W.M. Cleven, MSc, is PhD Candidate at the Department of Criminology of the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Is It All That Fishy? A Critical Review of the Concerns Surrounding Third Party Litigation Funding in Europe

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2021
Trefwoorden access to justice, third-party litigation fund, collective redress, Europe, conflicts of interest
Auteurs Adrian Cordina
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Virtually all major jurisdictions worldwide, including those in Europe, have been facing constrained budgets in civil justice and increasing litigation volume, delays, complexity and costs in the last few decades. This makes it difficult, or impossible, for certain individuals and entities to pursue meritorious claims, be it individually or collectively, posing a significant challenge to access to justice. With third-party funding (TPF) of litigation frequently touted as a promising private funding solution to this problem, this article explores the question of how and why the proliferation of TPF has been viewed with a considerable degree of caution in Europe, and questions to what extent this caution is warranted. The scale of the civil justice crisis in Europe, the shift from public to private funding and the purported benefits of TPF are first briefly investigated. The article then proceeds to critically examine, including from a law-and-economics perspective, the main sources of concern leading to the scepticism shown towards TPF in Europe, which is still largely unregulated. These sources are the commodification of justice, conflicts of interest and funder capital inadequacy. Particular reference is made to the regulatory frameworks of the jurisdictions of England and Wales, the Netherlands and Germany in Europe, and at the European Union level, to the Representative Actions Directive. It concludes by restating the potential benefits and complexity of this industry and the importance of distinguishing and analysing the arguments most commonly raised against it in the literature, policy and jurisprudence.


Adrian Cordina
Adrian Cordina, LLM, is a PhD candidate at the department of Private Law of the Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Article

Access_open Shifting Costs in American Discovery

A Critical Appraisal

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 4 2021
Trefwoorden discovery in litigation, access to justice, costs budget, civil procedure, American rule on fees and costs, costs shifting
Auteurs Jay Tidmarsh
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article examines proposals to reduce the cost of American discovery. It focuses on recent proposals and rules amendments to shift the entire cost of discovery to the party requesting discovery and then examines the idea of mandatorily shifting discovery costs in all cases. The article identifies a number of potential flaws with mandatory cost shifting. It then evaluates several proposals that might achieve the same end with fewer side effects, finding that two of them deserve consideration and, ideally, real-world experimentation.


Jay Tidmarsh
Jay Tidmarsh is the Judge James J. Clynes, Jr. Professor of Law at The University of Notre Dame Law School, Indiana, USA.
Toont 1 - 20 van 437 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 21 22
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.