Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 56 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x
Werk in uitvoering

Living on the Other Side: A socio-legal analysis of family law and migration in Morocco

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden family law, migration, Morocco, socio-legal studies
Auteurs Nada Heddane MA (Master in North African and Middle Eastern Studies) en Judith van Uden MSc (Master in International Development Studies)
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In our research project ‘Living on the Other Side’, we aim to understand how (ir)regular migrants from the Middle East and West/Central Africa deal with the legal and formal aspect of their lives in Morocco by focusing on major life events, such as marriage, divorce, birth and death. Life does not simply stand still when residing in a foreign country – people continue to marry, divorce, have children and die. However, there is little empirical knowledge on what migrants actually do when faced with such events. Registering major life events secures a migrant’s legal identity and protects their human rights. Having a legal identity, most likely, influences the daily lives of migrants. A migrant, who does not formally exist in the eyes of the state, might not be able to access basic services, like health care and education. From a legal pluralist perspective, we aim to investigate how migration and family law intersect by conducting online and offline ethnographic fieldwork.


Nada Heddane MA (Master in North African and Middle Eastern Studies)
Nada Heddane is promovenda bij het Van Vollenhoven Instituut voor Recht, Bestuur en Samenleving (VVI) van de Rechtenfaculteit van de Universiteit Leiden. Nada’s onderzoek verkent de relevantie van het familierecht voor West-/Centraal-Afrikaanse migranten bij belangrijke levensgebeurtenissen. Zij geeft een sociaaljuridische analyse van de strategieën van migranten op basis van online en offline veldwerk in Marokko.

Judith van Uden MSc (Master in International Development Studies)
Nada Heddane is Promovenda bij het Van Vollenhoven Instituut voor Recht, Bestuur en Samenleving (VVI) van de Rechtenfaculteit van de Universiteit Leiden. In haar onderzoek bevraagt Judith wat de rol is van het familierecht in de levens van Midden-Oosterse migranten in Marokko. Deze kwalitatieve studie bekijkt de ervaringen van migranten door een juridisch-antropologische lens.
Artikel

Persoonsgerichte handhaving van de socialezekerheidswetgeving

Een actieonderzoek naar de betekenis van motiverende houdingen in de uitvoeringspraktijk

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Regulatory enforcement, Motivational postures, Social security, Action research
Auteurs Dr. Paulien de Winter en Prof. dr. Marc Hertogh
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, we discuss a ‘person-centred’ view on the enforcement of social security laws. This is a new vision on enforcement whereby welfare workers can ‘differentiate’ in order to create more room for ‘customization’ with an eye for ‘the human dimension’ and an ‘appropriate’ enforcement style. Despite the unanimity about the desirability of this approach, most of the practical details are still unclear. Our central question is therefore: How may a person-centred approach of the enforcement of social security laws be implemented in practice? Based on an action research study, in which we closely collaborated with welfare workers and benefit recipients at a Dutch welfare office, we attempt to answer this question. We first discuss a number of central concepts from the enforcement literature and consider the concept of ‘motivational postures’. For this study, we developed a prototype of a new electronic analytical tool (which can be used to support enforcement) and then applied this tool in a small pilot study. In the article we describe our findings and discuss the experiences of benefit recipients and welfare workers with the analytical tool. We conclude that this tool appears to offer a good basis for the further development of the person-centred enforcement of social security laws.


Dr. Paulien de Winter
Paulien de Winter werkt als universitair docent bij de vakgroep Staatsrecht, Bestuursrecht en Bestuurskunde aan de faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Zij is gepromoveerd in de Rechtssociologie en doet onderzoek naar hoe uitvoerende medewerkers in de praktijk regels uitvoeren.

Prof. dr. Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is hoogleraar Rechtssociologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Centrale thema’s in zijn onderzoek zijn: de maatschappelijke beleving van recht en rechtsstaat; de sociale werking van wetgeving en handhaving; en de legitimiteit van het overheidsoptreden.
Artikel

Dispute settlement among the Nigerian Igbo in Antwerp

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2021
Trefwoorden Legal pluralism, Dispute settlement, Igbo, Antwerp
Auteurs Filip Reyntjens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This is a case study in ‘new legal pluralism’ which is interested in the operation of plural legal orders in countries of the global North. It considers the way in which the Nigerian Igbo living in Antwerp, Belgium settle their disputes. It first presents the Antwerp Igbo’s organisation in a Union possessing a constitution with precise legal stipulations. It then finds that the Igbo take the law with them from their home region into a diasporic community. Next it looks into the concrete organisation of dispute settlement and presents five cases as exemplars. It then discusses the advantages and drawbacks of applying Igbo law and justice, the issue of women’s rights, and the plurality and flexibility of the system. The conclusion underscores the fact that legal pluralism is a universal empirical reality.


Filip Reyntjens
Filip Reyntjens is Emeritus hoogleraar bij het Instituut voor Ontwikkelingsbeleid aan de Universiteit Antwerpen.

Prof. dr. Koen Van Aeken
Koen Van Aeken is senior hoofddocent aan de Faculteit Rechten van de Universiteit Antwerpen. Hij doceert rechtssociologie in de eerste Bachelor en de Master, en Legal Research Methodology en Empirical Research Methods in Law in de LLM. Zijn onderzoek situeert zich op het terrein van wetsevaluatie, regulering en governance, recht en digitalisering, en juridische en empirische onderzoeksmethodologie.
Artikel

Upperdogs Versus Underdogs

Judicial Review of Administrative Drug-Related Closures in the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Eviction, War on drugs, Party capability, Empirical legal research, Drug policy
Auteurs Mr. Michelle Bruijn en Dr. Michel Vols
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, mayors are entitled to close public and non-public premises if drug-related activities are being conducted there. Using data from the case law of Dutch lower courts, published between 2008 and 2016, this article examines the relative success of different types of litigants, and the influence of case characteristics on drug-related closure cases. We build on Galanter’s framework of ‘repeat players’ and ‘one-shotters’, to argue that a mayor is the stronger party and is therefore more likely to win in court. We categorise mayors as ‘upperdogs’, and the opposing litigants as ‘underdogs’. Moreover, we distinguish stronger mayors from weaker ones, based on the population size of their municipality. Similarly, we distinguish the stronger underdogs from the weaker ones. Businesses and organisations are classified as stronger parties, relative to individuals, who are classified as weaker parties. In line with our hypothesis, we find that mayors win in the vast majority of cases. However, contrary to our presumptions, we find that mayors have a significantly lower chance of winning a case if they litigate against weak underdogs. When controlling for particular case characteristics, such as the type of drugs and invoked defences, our findings offer evidence that case characteristics are consequential for the resolution of drug-related closure cases in the Netherlands.


Mr. Michelle Bruijn
Michelle Bruijn is promovendus en docent aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Haar onderzoek richt zich op de regulering van cannabis en de sluiting van drugspanden.

Dr. Michel Vols
Michel Vols is hoogleraar Openbare-Orderecht aan Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Zijn onderzoek richt zich op Openbare orde en veiligheid, en het gebruik van data science (machine learning) bij het bestuderen van juridische data.
Artikel

Access_open Burgerparticipatie onder de Omgevingswet: niet omdat het moet, maar omdat het kan?!

De juridische waarborging van burgerparticipatie in de Omgevingswet

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden Burgerparticipatie, Omgevingswet, Rechtsbescherming, Inspraak, maatschappelijk draagvlak, Kerninstrumenten, snellere en betere aanpak
Auteurs Mr. dr. Marlon Boeve en Mr. dr. Frank Groothuijse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public participation is an important issue in the forthcoming Dutch Environment and Planning Act (2021). The importance of participation is emphasized in numerous places in the parliamentary documents to the Act. This contribution discusses how the new Act gives legal substance to the objectives that the government is pursuing regarding participation and whether the involvement of citizens is indeed better imbedded by this act. It addresses the important subject of the ‘right moment of participation’ in the fragmented Dutch policy and decision system. Consecutively it deals with the question of potential legal consequences for non-compliance by administrative bodies to the legal participation obligations when drawing up plans and decisions. Can a citizen enforce (substantive) participation in the administrative court after the Environmental and Planning Act comes into force? The possibilities are limited. Findings show that the new Environment and Planning Act does not address the essential problems that arise with participation. The successful creation of local support, better quality and faster decision-making through participation all depend on how the (local) government shapes participation. From a legal perspective, the Environment and Planning Act makes little contribution to this. In the view of the authors this is not surprising, because the role of legislation in safeguarding substantive participation should not be overestimated.


Mr. dr. Marlon Boeve
Marlon Boeve is universitair docent omgevingsrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht en verbonden aan het Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law.

Mr. dr. Frank Groothuijse
Frank Groothuijse is universitair hoofddocent omgevingsrecht aan de Universiteit Utrecht en verbonden aan het Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law.
Artikel

De Omgevingswet: wetgeving als symbool of communicatieve wetgeving?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden Symboolwerking van wetgeving, Omgevingswet, Crisis- en herstelwet, Communicatieve wetgeving, Wetgevingsevaluatie
Auteurs Dr. Friso Johannes Jansen MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Crisis and Recovery Act and the Environmental Planning Act are analysed in this article as a form of communicative legislation. This approach to socio-legal analysis draws attention to the need to understand the symbolic effects of legislation as independent drivers of compliance. The modest legal effects of the Crisis and Recovery Act are contrasted with the more sizeable symbolic effects of this legalisation. In addition, the ex-ante evaluation of the Environmental Planning Act shows that the proposed legal changes can only provide a small impetus to the desired culture change, nonetheless there is potential for areas of this law to have symbolic effects as well. These could potentially contribute independently to its success.


Dr. Friso Johannes Jansen MSc
Friso J. Jansen is Senior Lecturer in Law at Birmingham City University.
Artikel

Manoeuvreren binnen smalle marges

Over de rol van wetgevingsjuristen bij de totstandkoming van wet- en regelgeving

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2019
Trefwoorden Legislation, Legislative drafting, Professionalism, Legal Ethics, Sociology of Law
Auteurs Dr. Nienke Doornbos en Mr. dr. Arnt Mein
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the past five years, the Council of State, the National Ombudsman and several academics have criticized the way in which new legislation has been made. In their view, principles of law and the rule of law are insufficiently uphold due to an instrumentalist view on law. This criticism urged the authors to conduct an empirical study into the question how legislative drafters deal with legislative plans which are problematic from a legal or rule of law point of view, and how they justify their role in the legislative process. This study is explorative and qualitative in nature. During the summer of 2018, 24 legislative lawyers from five different Dutch ministries have been interviewed. The results show that the role of legislative lawyers can best be characterized as constructively critical. As their tasks encompass much more than solely the actual drafting of legislation, they more and more resemble their colleagues from the policy department. The authors suggest that legislative lawyers should articulate their distinctive professional ethics in order to strengthen the checks and balances within the ministries.


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

Mr. dr. Arnt Mein
Arnt Mein is lector Legal Management aan de Hogeschool van Amsterdam, faculteit Maatschappij en Recht. Hij doet onderzoek naar onder meer de beroepshouding van juristen.
Artikel

Verdergaan met de sociale-werkingsbenadering

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2018
Trefwoorden Effectiveness of law, social working approach, semi-autonomous social fields, smoking bans, impact assessments
Auteurs Heleen Weyers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    John Griffiths’ social working approach of legislation tries to estimate the direct effects of laws which prescribe certain behavior. The basic idea of the approach is that rule-guided behavior (direct effect) is influenced by the different groups citizens belong to. Griffiths refers to these groups using the concept coined by Sally Moore (1971) ‘semi-autonomous social fields’. Although Griffiths never formulated hypotheses regarding the relation between SASFs and direct effects, the article explores two of them: If the relevant SASFs accept the new norm, direct effects will occur; and if the relevant SASFs are not ‘though’ (and don’t accept the new norm) direct effects will occur. These two hypotheses are related to the results of smoking bans in bars in the Netherlands. The acceptance of the smoking bans in bars is low. The thoughness of the SASFs in bars and their organization differ in time and so did the compliance with the smoking bans. Because this article is not based on research that depart from the hypotheses, further research based on the hypotheses is needed to draw firm conclusions. The article is rounded up with a plea to use Griffiths approach in impact assessments of legislation.


Heleen Weyers
Heleen Weyers studeerde filosofie en geschiedenis en startte in 1995 haar promotietraject bij John Griffiths. Dat resulteerde in het boek Euthanasie: het proces van rechtsverandering (2002) en een aanstelling als universitair docent bij de Vakgroep Rechtstheorie van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Samen met John (en anderen) schreef/redigeerde ze Euthanasia and Law in the Netherlands (1998) en Euthanasia and Law in Europe (2008) en verzorgde ze de vierde editie van het leerboek De sociale werking van recht. Een kennismaking met de rechtssociologie en rechtsantropologie (2005). Zij heeft zich sedert 2002 niet alleen beziggehouden met de totstandkoming van wetgeving, maar ook met de relatie tussen de totstandkoming en de effectiviteit van rechtsregels.
Artikel

The effective public enforcement of cartels: perceptions on the functioning of the objection procedure and the reality

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden Dispute resolution, Objection procedure, Cartel enforcement, Administrative law, Stakeholder interviews
Auteurs Mr. Annalies Outhuijse LLM
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Companies fined for infringing the cartel prohibition are denied access to the courts until the competition authority has reviewed its fining decision in the objection procedure. Several stakeholders have been negative about the functioning of this objection procedure in case of cartel fines, including because of its limited ability to resolve disputes and the cost and length of the procedure. In light of the discussions on the effectiveness of this objection procedure, this article analyses the ability of the cartel objection procedure to resolve disputes on basis of an analysis of the decisions on objection, as well as interviews with the parties involved in the objection procedure and a study of relevant literature. Previous studies have shown that the success of the objection procedure, regarding dispute resolution, depends on the nature of the dispute, the reason that the objection is made and the organisation of the procedure. Reviewing the data which was gathered through the interviews and case analysis with the knowledge of these factors influencing the success of the objection procedure, the article concludes that these previously carried out studies can explain the limited ability of the cartel objection procedure to resolve disputes.


Mr. Annalies Outhuijse LLM
Annalies Outhuijse is PhD fellow at the Department of Administrative Law at the University of Groningen.

Dr. Agnes Schreiner
Agnes Schreiner is oud-redacteur van Recht der Werkelijkheid en op het moment lid van de redactieraad. Als universitair docent is Schreiner werkzaam bij de Afdeling Algemene Rechtsleer, sectie Rechtssociologie/antropologie, van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit van Amsterdam. In 1990 promoveerde ze op Roem van het recht. Tegenwoordig draagt ze bij aan het onderwijs van de genoemde afdeling, onder meer de vakken Recht en menselijk gedrag en Europese rechtsgeschiedenis. Ze begeleidt studenten met belangstelling voor Australische en Europese rechtsculturen. Over deze onderwerpen heeft ze regelmatig gepubliceerd.
Artikel

‘Ik ben slecht in het legen van mijn brievenbus en heb een telefoonfobie’

Het belang van een match in het soort contact tussen uitkeringsgerechtigden en uitkeringsinstanties

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden Satisfaction, Digital contact, Matching, Public Assistance
Auteurs Dr. Willem Bantema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, contacts between citizens and the government have increasingly become digital. Most people believe that the development toward more digital and thus more impersonal contact could be negative in terms of procedural justice and policy effectiveness. Higher educated and younger citizens embrace contact through the internet more than lower educated and older citizens. This study questions the call for more personal contact. Based on a panel survey, two different kinds of recipients of public assistance are compared: recipients of municipal social services (N=596) and recipients of unemployment benefits (N=709). Because of the social-demographic characteristics mentioned earlier, the recipients of the former are expected to be more negative about digital contact than the latter. This study identifies how these types of recipients of public assistance prefer to have contact with their municipality or agency, and how that works in practice. It shows that neither personal contact preferences, nor the way contact works in practice are decisive for satisfaction with the contact, but the way those two elements are matched. A match of impersonal contact leads to similar satisfaction as a match of personal contact.


Dr. Willem Bantema
Dr. Willem Bantema is senior onderzoeker binnen de interdisciplinaire onderzoeksgroep ‘Handhaving van onderop’ aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en is werkzaam als docent-onderzoeker aan het lectoraat Cybersafety aan de Noorderlijke Hoge School Leeuwarden (NHL). Hij is gespecialiseerd in kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethoden en geïnteresseerd in de wijze waarop mensen in hun dagelijks leven met wetgeving omgaan.
Artikel

“The production of law”: Law in action in the everyday and the juridical consequences of juridification

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden juridification, production of space, law in action, local bye-laws
Auteurs dr. mr. Danielle Chevalier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In an increasingly diversifying society, public space is the quintessential social realm1x Lofland 1998. where members of that diverse society meet each other. Thus space is shared, whilst norms regarding that space are not always shared. Of rivalling norms, some are codified into formal law, in a process Habermas called juridification. Early Habermas regarded juridification a negative process, ‘colonizing the lifeworld’. Later Habermas argued juridification a viable pillar for conviviality in diversity. The shift in Habermas’ perspective invites the question how law works in action. In this article a frame is offered to scrutinize the working of law in action in public space, by applying the conceptual triad of spatial thinker Lefebvre to understand how law is “produced”. It argues that how law is perceived in action is pivotal to understanding how law works in action. Moreover, it discusses the possible ramifications of the perception of law in action for how the legal system as a whole is perceived.

Noten

  • 1 Lofland 1998.


dr. mr. Danielle Chevalier
Danielle Chevalier is a lecturer and research fellow at the University of Amsterdam, affiliated to both the Bonger Institute for Criminology and the Amsterdam School for Social Science Research. Her academic works focuses on the intersection of the legal and the spatial, positioned within the frames of urban sociology, criminology and legal sociology. More specifically she researches legal interventions in the urban realm through qualitative methods, and publishes both on law in action and research methods. Her current project centers on the development of the concept 'emotional ownership of public space'.
Redactioneel

Social Theory and Legal Practices

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2016
Auteurs Tobias Arnoldussen, Dr. Robert Knegt en Associate Professor Rob Schwitters
Auteursinformatie

Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is a socio-legal scholar affiliated with the University of Amsterdam Law School and the PPLE honours college. Next to lecturing on a variety of subjects, he focusses on interdisciplinary legal research into the possibilities of law to deal with contemporary social problems.

Dr. Robert Knegt
Dr. Robert Knegt is Guest Researcher at the Hugo Sinzheimer Institute, University of Amsterdam. As a sociologist of law, he has been project leader of numerous research projects that combine legal and sociological methods in the field of labour relations. He is particularly interested in a historical-sociological study of long-term developments in the normative structuration of labour relations.

Associate Professor Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is Associate Professor of Sociology of Law and connected to the Paul Scholten Centre at the University of Amsterdam. He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state and compliance.
Artikel

The legacy and current relevance of Cappelletti and the Florence project on access to justice

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden definition and dimensions access to justice, recommendations, historic context access to justice, current context access to justice
Auteurs Bernard Hubeau
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution explains what access to justice can encompass and how the ideals about access to justice have developed in time. The way to do this is going back to the work of the famous scholars Cappelletti and Garth, who were responsible for a worldwide project on access to justice in the 1970s. Their main issue was to explain access to justice is more than the access to a judge and the organization of courts. Primarily, the system must be equally accessible to all, irrespective of social or economic status or other incapacity. But it also must lead to results that are individually and socially just and fair. Equal access and effective access are the central notions. Their work is put in perspective. The importance of their legacy and the question how we can get along with their work are stressed. Their definition is compared to a few other authoritative definitions. The waves in the history of access to justice are described and putting them in the current context illustrates why a fourth waved can be observed. The major question to be answered is how one can assess the challenges and obstacles of access to justice in the current context. Therefore, some recent dimensions and developments within access to justice are presented: the democratic dimension, the effectiveness of new social rights, the attention for poor and vulnerable people, further juridification, expanding frontiers of and monitoring access to justice, e-justice, and self-help. Finally, a few building blocks for reforms are presented.


Bernard Hubeau
Bernard Hubeau is a full-time Professor in Sociology and Sociology of Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Antwerp. He also teaches at the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Antwerp and the Faculty of Law and Criminology of the University of Brussels. He is the former ombudsman of the city of Antwerp and of the Flemish Parliament.
Artikel

Social security and social welfare: barriers and retrograde policies, but cause for optimism?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden social security, legal representation, means-testing, Britain, fees
Auteurs Amir Paz-Fuchs
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution addresses the limits placed on access to justice in the context of social services, with a particular, but not exclusive, focus on the UK, across five central platforms: legal representation, the financial barriers, the structure of the programme, the attitude of the bureaucracy, and the personal attributes of the client. The contribution finds that there exist, for decades, problematic elements that constitute barriers to justice in this area: the means-tested element in the programmes and the bureaucracy’s double role as provider of services and detector of fraud. But to them, in recent years, significant barriers were added: recent cuts in legal aid and the imposition of tribunal fees in the UK are retrograde steps, reverting 40 years of impressive achievements in the field.


Amir Paz-Fuchs
Amir Paz-Fuchs (D. Phil Oxford) is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Law, University of Sussex, where he teaches employment law, public law, and legal theory. In addition, he is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and a Research Associate at Wolfson College, both at the University of Oxford. He is also Co-Director of the ‘The Limits of Privatization’ research project, based at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem. He also served on the board of several human rights and social justice NGOs.
Artikel

Merits testing in the English legal aid system: exploring its impact in asylum cases

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden access to justice, asylum seekers, merits testing, English legal aid system
Auteurs Tamara Butter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, there has been much discussion on the legal aid cuts and reforms in England and Wales, and the possible consequences this would have on access to justice for vulnerable groups in society, including immigrants and asylum seekers. This contribution focuses on one element of the English legal aid system: merits testing by legal aid providers in asylum cases. It explores whether and, if so, how this aspect may affect the access to justice for asylum seekers lacking the financial means to pay privately for legal assistance and representation. The findings indicate that a merits test which makes access to legal aid on appeal conditional upon a case having at least 50% prospect of success and makes legal aid providers responsible for conducting this assessment may compromise asylum seekers’ ability to achieve justice both within and outside the existing body of law.


Tamara Butter
Tamara Butter is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Sociology of Law/Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University of Nijmegen. Her research consists of a comparative case study into the professional decision making of asylum legal aid lawyers in the Netherlands and England.
Artikel

Access to justice in consumer law

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden consumer law, enforcement of consumer rights, costs of procedure, obstacles for enforcement
Auteurs Marco Loos
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In many areas of private law, mandatory substantive law protects consumers. In this contribution, I will argue that awarding consumer rights without properly regulating the consumer’s access to the court system renders these rights unenforceable through the ordinary courts. Several obstacles to the proper enforcement of consumer rights by individuals are identified, ranging from consumers’ lack of knowledge of their rights to the formalities of proceedings, the use of complex jargon and the costs involved in court procedures. It is argued that these obstacles produce such disincentives for consumers to maintain their rights that the result is that they do so in an insufficient manner, which leads to under-enforcement of consumer law.


Marco Loos
Marco Loos is Professor of Private Law, in particular of European consumer law, at the Centre for the Study of European Contract Law of the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands and member of the Board of the Ius Commune Research School.
Artikel

Responsibilities of the state and legal professions

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden responsibilities, the state, lawyers, the judiciary and judges
Auteurs Mies Westerveld en Ashley Terlouw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution, which is based on the Dutch legal system, deals with the responsibilities of the State and legal professions in ensuring access to justice. The responsibilities of the four main players involved in bringing justice to the citizen are discussed: the legislator, the executive, the judiciary, and the legal profession. Responsibilities for access to justice do not only stem from the law, they do also evolve from societal problems and discussions. The contribution deals with both. Several actors share some of the responsibilities. One can think of responsibilities for information, for financing, and for being aware of vulnerabilities and other obstacles. What are the legal responsibilities and what other responsibilities are felt by the actors involved and how do they deal with them? And as a result: do they contribute to access to justice, do they form an obstacle, or both?


Mies Westerveld
Mies Westerveld is Professor Legal aid by special appointment and Professor in Labour Law (social insurance) at the University of Amsterdam. Her research concentrates on current issues of access to justice and state-financed legal aid on the one hand and the decreasing role of social insurance on a fragmented labour market on the other hand.

Ashley Terlouw
Ashley Terlouw is Professor in Sociology of Law at the Radboud University of Nijmegen. She is responsible for the Centre for Migration Law of the Radboud University. Besides she is part-time Judge at the District Court of Gelderland. Her research concentrates on legal and societal issues of asylum and equal treatment and on the working of the judiciary.
Artikel

Challenges and obstacles to access to justice in health care

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden patients’ rights, disciplinary law, medical negligence, right to complain
Auteurs Aart Hendriks
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Netherlands, patients have a large number of options to express their dissatisfaction about the services provided by health care providers and can institute all kind of (quasi) legal procedures. None of these procedures was however introduced to ensure patients’ right to access to justice. Access to justice for health care providers confronted with complaints by patients is even less guaranteed. An analysis of Dutch law and practice learns that the access to justice has not found an inroad in the health care sector yet. This is not to suggest that patients lack legal rights, but if access to justice was taken as a yardstick to measures laws against the health care sector, they would have looked differently.


Aart Hendriks
Aart Hendriks is Professor in Health Law at Leiden University, the Netherlands, legal advisor to the Royal Dutch Medical Association, and substitute judge at the District Court of Rotterdam. He has published extensively on health and human rights issues. He serves as advisor to various national and international organizations, is board member of a number of administrative bodies, and is editor of several scientific journals in the field of health, medicine, and human rights.
Toont 1 - 20 van 56 gevonden teksten
« 1 3
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.