Zoekresultaat: 12 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Jaar 2012 x Rubriek Artikel x
Artikel

Medical liability: do doctors care?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Ben C.J. van Velthoven en Peter W. van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Van Velthoven and Van Wijck review empirical studies on the effects of tort law in the medical sector. The data they present comes mainly from the US, because from the 1970’s US states have enacted a variety of reforms in their tort systems. This variation has provided very useful data to study preventive effects. The empirical evidence analysed shows that medical malpractice risk affects the behaviour of health care providers. It has a negative impact on the supply of services and it encourages extra diagnostic testing;yet if the additional tests and procedures have any value, it is only a marginal one. Furthermore it has been found that changes in the supply of services do not affect health adversely. This suggests that the physicians who are driven out of business have a below average quality of performance. The authors conclude that, at the margin, medical liability law may have some social benefits after all.


Ben C.J. van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University. His research interests are: liability issues, civil litigation, and criminal law enforcement.

Peter W. van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University and coordinator strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern tort law, contract law, civil litigation, and crime.
Artikel

Non-pecuniary damages: financial incentive or symbol?

Comparing an economic and a sociological account of tort law

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2012
Auteurs Rob Schwitters
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Schwitters focuses on the differences between economic and a sociological perspectives on non-pecuniary damages. By exposing the alternative perspectives on this issue, he illuminates some methodological differences between both disciplines. Although law and economics has had a positive influence on empirical research, he questions the merits of this perspective when analysing non-pecuniary damages. Law and economics regards non-pecuniary damages exclusively as a financial incentive to realise optimal deterrence and maximisation of welfare. Alternatively, in sociology of law there is also attention for the symbolic dimension of law in which rules are seen as normative standards of behaviour. Compensation is a way to bring the wrongdoer to recognise that he has done wrong and has to compensate the victim, and to show the victim that his rights are taken seriously. Through a sociological lens, the adoption of an exclusively economic model of human behaviour has to be questioned. To what extent human behaviour is really influenced by either financial incentives or by normative standards of behaviour is an open empirical question. Finally, he argues that the decision to base our institutions (such as law) on economic underpinnings is a decision which itself cannot be based on an economic procedure of aggregating individual preferences and maximising welfare.


Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.
Artikel

ADR in the Netherlands and ‘Europe’

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden ADR Directive, ODR Regulation, Mediation
Auteurs mr. dr. Betty Santing-Wubs
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article deals with two European proposals on consumer disputes: one proposal for an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Directive and one for an Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Regulation. The European Mediation Directive is also taken into account. Important issues are the voluntary nature of ADR and the quality of the so-called ADR entities.
    Some regulation in the field of ADR might be useful, but the proposals are quite detailed. In the Netherlands, till now ADR has been successful without too much – or even without any – regulation. The two proposals could lead to undesirable intervention in an effective self-regulating ADR system.


mr. dr. Betty Santing-Wubs
Betty Santing-Wubs is universitair docent privaatrecht aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. a.h.santing-wubs@rug.nl.
Artikel

Deuren op slot

Naar een verklaring voor de internationale daling van criminaliteit

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 7 2012
Trefwoorden Crime Victim Survey, Crime levels, Marxist criminology, Crime opportunity theory, Crime prevention
Auteurs J.J.M. van Dijk
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the opening section the author refers to the classical book of Dutch criminologist Willem Bonger on the links between poverty/social injustice and levels of crime. He then introduces his own work on the International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) since 1989. The ICVS trend data on crime in Western countries during 1989 up to 2010 show a curvilinear movement peaking around 2000. The upward trend seems to track economic growth and to have mainly been caused by increased opportunities of crime. His analytical results concerning car theft and household burglary suggest that the international falls in crime since 2000 are largely caused by improved security. A comparative analysis shows for example that burglary rates have fallen in countries with high levels of home security such as Great Britain and the Netherlands and have continued to rise in low security countries such as Denmark and Switzerland. The author concludes that criminology has evolved both methodologically and theoretically since the publication of Bonger’s book in 1905. Some fundamental principles of the discipline, however, appear to have remained unchanged. Van Dijk’s own work is, just like that of Bonger, policy- oriented. It is driven by the motivation to assist governments in finding better ways to reduce suffering of human beings from crime, either as victims or as offenders.


J.J.M. van Dijk
Prof. dr. mr. Jan van Dijk is als hoogleraar verbonden aan Intervict, het International Victimology Institute van de Universiteit van Tilburg. De oorspronkelijke Engelse titel van deze lezing luidt Closing the doors, een verwijzing naar een boek over suïcidepreventie van Ron Clarke, getiteld Suicide: Closing the exits. In dit boek en in een daarna verschenen artikel van Ron Clarke en Pat Mayhew werd empirisch bewijs gepresenteerd van het feit dat een verandering in de samenstelling van het aardgas in huishoudens in Groot-Brittannië en Nederland halverwege de jaren tachtig leidde tot een abrupte daling van het aantal mensen dat zelfmoord pleegde met behulp van gas, zonder dat er een duidelijke verschuiving naar andere manieren van zelfdoding optrad (Clarke & Mayhew 1989). Als een zeer gemotiveerde daad zoals zelfmoord kan worden teruggedrongen door eenvoudige situationele maatregelen, waarom, vroegen de auteurs zich af, zou dat dan niet kunnen met diverse vormen van opportunistische diefstal, zoals joyriding of inbraken in de wijk? Inderdaad, waarom niet?
Artikel

Access_open Exciting Times for Legal Scholarship

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2012
Trefwoorden legal methodology, law as an academic discipline, ‘law and …’-movements, legal theory, innovative and multiform legal scholarship
Auteurs Jan Vranken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Until recently, legal-dogmatic research stood at the undisputed pinnacle of legal scientific research. The last few years saw increasing criticism, both nationally and internationally, levelled at this type of research or at its dominant role. Some see this as a crisis in legal scholarship, but a closer look reveals a great need for facts, common sense, and nuance. Critics usually base their calls for innovation on a one-dimensional and flawed image of legal-dogmatic research. In this article, the author subsequently addresses the various critical opinions themselves and provide an overview of the innovations that are proposed. He concludes that there are a lot of efforts to innovate legal scholarship, and that the field is more multiform than ever, which is a wonderful and unprecedented state of affairs. This multiformity should be cherished and given plenty of room to develop and grow, because most innovative movements are still fledgling and need time, sometimes a lot of time, to increase in quality. It would be a shame to nip them in the bud now, merely because they are still finding their way. In turn, none of these innovative movements have cause to disqualify legal-dogmatic research, as sometimes happens (implicitly), by first creating a straw-man version of the field and then dismissing it as uninteresting or worse. That only polarises the discussion and gains us nothing. Progress can only be achieved through cooperation, with an open mind towards different types of legal research and a willingness to accept a critical approach towards their development. In the end, the only criterion that matters is quality. All types of research are principally subject to the same quality standards. The author provides some clarification regarding these standards as well.


Jan Vranken
Jan Vranken is hoogleraar Methodologie van het privaatrecht aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Access_open ‘Down Freedom’s Main Line’

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden democracy, radical freedom, free market economy, consumerism, collective action
Auteurs Steven L. Winter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Two waves of democratization define the post-Cold War era of globalization. The first one saw democracies emerge in post-communist countries and post-Apartheid South Africa. The current wave began with the uprisings in the Middle East. The first focused on the formal institutions of the market and the liberal state, the second is participatory and rooted in collective action. The individualistic conception of freedom and democracy that underlies the first wave is false and fetishistic. The second wave shows democracy’s moral appeal is the commitment to equal participation in determining the terms and conditions of social life. Freedom, thus, requires collective action under conditions of equality, mutual recognition, and respect.


Steven L. Winter
Steven L. Winter is Walter S. Gibbs Professor of Constitutional Law at Wayne State University Law School, Detroit, Michigan.

    This article examines the practice of foreclosure mediation in the American mortgage market after the financial crisis of 2008. Many states have implemented foreclosure mediation programs to handle the deluge of foreclosure proceedings in the aftermath of the financial crisis. The role of the mortgage servicing industry in the success or failure of this type of mediation is discussed, as well as the possible outcomes of a foreclosure mediation.


Ken Andries
Ken Andries is docent aan de Universiteit Hasselt en advocaat aan de balie van Brussel.
Artikel

Access_open Globalization as a Factor in General Jurisprudence

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 2 2012
Trefwoorden general jurisprudence, globalization, global legal pluralism, legal positivism, analytical jurisprudence
Auteurs Sidney Richards
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Globalization is commonly cited as an important factor in theorising legal phenomena in the contemporary world. Although many legal disciplines have sought to adapt their theories to globalization, progress has been comparatively modest within contemporary analytical jurisprudence. This paper aims to offer a survey of recent scholarship on legal theory and globalization and suggests various ways in which these writings are relevant to the project of jurisprudence. This paper argues, more specifically, that the dominant interpretation of globalization frames it as a particular form of legal pluralism. The resulting concept – global legal pluralism – comes in two broad varieties, depending on whether it emphasizes normative or institutional pluralism. This paper goes on to argue that these concepts coincide with two central themes of jurisprudence, namely its concern with normativity and institutionality. Finally, this paper reflects on the feasibility of constructing a ‘general’ and ‘descriptive’ jurisprudence in light of globalization.


Sidney Richards
Sidney Richards is Doctoral candidate in Law at Pembroke College at the University of Cambridge.

Prof. mr. E.H. Hondius
Prof. Mr. E.H. Hondius is hoogleraar Europees privaatrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Stilzwijgen onder toezichthouders

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2012
Trefwoorden secrecy, denial, silence, monitoring
Auteurs Henk van de Bunt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article examines the silence of control agents. It is often said that control agents as representatives of the risk society are obsessed with control activities and fact-finding, and that rule breakers are regularly exposed by negative publicity. The author takes the contrary position that even major cases demonstrate the persistence of silence on the part of control agents. He distinguishes between two types of silence: denial and secrecy. Denial means that control agents saw nothing while they could have discovered wrongdoing. He points to the fact that this denial in the face of knowledge is the result of sociological ambivalence: control agents are often forced to reconcile conflicting interests, which supersede the importance of supervision. The article shows that secrecy plays an important role in trust relationships between control agents and the objects of their supervision. Secrecy enables control agents to better obtain information. In effect, with regard to the supply of information and the scrutiny of the objects under supervision, control agents are dependent on the cooperativeness of the objects of supervision. These days, much emphasis is placed on breaking the walls of silence. Perpetrators, victims and witnesses, as well as control agents, are being encouraged to break the silence through the use of star witness arrangements, whistleblower arrangements, witness protection, and reporting centres. But is this effective? The author suggests that maintaining secrecy is essential and that those measures limit the space for control agents to develop trust relationships with the objects of supervision, and thereby the opportunity to engage in fact-finding.


Henk van de Bunt
Prof. dr. Henk van de Bunt is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. E-mail:vandebunt@law.eur.nl
Artikel

Hoe passen overeenkomsten met het oog op duurzaamheid binnen de rechtstreeks werkende uitzondering van het karteltoezicht?

Interpretatie uitzonderingscriteria door NMa voor samenwerking in verband met duurzaamheid

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Toezicht, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden kartelverbod, duurzaam, uitzonderingscriteria, samenwerken, NMa
Auteurs N. Rosenboom
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Er heerst onzekerheid bij Nederlandse ondernemingen die willen samenwerken met het oog op duurzaamheid. Zij stuiten bij de self-assessment van het kartelverbod van het mededingingstoezicht op onvoldoende duidelijkheid over de invulling van de uitzonderingscriteria van artikel 6 lid 3 Mw. De NMa houdt mededingingstoezicht op de naleving van bedrijven van onder andere het kartelverbod op de Nederlandse markt. Dit artikel bespreekt hoe de NMa criteria voor uitzondering van het kartelverbod interpreteert en hoe ondernemingen hun bewijslast voor de self-assessment economisch kunnen onderbouwen.


N. Rosenboom
N. Rosenboom is als onderzoeker werkzaam bij SEO Economisch Onderzoek, bij het cluster Mededinging & Regulering.
Artikel

De regulering van en het toezicht op ratingbureaus in de Europese Unie

De wijziging van Verordening (EG) nr. 1060/2009 inzake ratingbureaus, ESMA en het nieuwe wijzigingsvoorstel: de definitieve aanpak van de belangrijkste problemen in de ratingmarkt?

Tijdschrift Onderneming en Financiering, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden voorstel tot wijziging verordening inzake ratingbureaus, credit rating agencies, ESMA, toezicht, handhaving
Auteurs Mr. J.C. Jaakke
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze bijdrage wordt het op 15 november door de Commissie aangenomen voorstel tot wijziging van Verordening (EG) nr. 1060/2009 inzake ratingbureaus besproken. Na het van kracht worden van Verordening 1060/2009 is er een eerste wijziging aangebracht die de registratie van en het toezicht op ratingbureaus in de Europese Unie overdraagt aan het ondertussen opgerichte ESMA (European Securities and Markets Authority). Met het nieuwe voorstel beoogt de Commissie eindelijk de grootste problemen aan te pakken. Deze aanpak van de Commissie wordt in deze bijdrage kritisch besproken.


Mr. J.C. Jaakke
Mr. J.C. Jaakke is advocaat bij Houthoff Buruma te Amsterdam.
Interface Showing Amount
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.