Zoekresultaat: 60 artikelen

x
Jaar 2013 x

    Sinds de invoering van het Burgerlijk Wetboek in 1838 heeft men herhaaldelijk getracht de gronden voor echtscheiding te verruimen. Hoewel deze gronden uiteindelijk pas verruimd werden in 1971, werd de tot die tijd bestaande situatie, waarbij echtscheiding slechts op vier gronden mogelijk was en echtscheiding met wederzijds goedvinden verboden was, als onwenselijk beschouwd. Dit gevoelen werd nog sterker na het arrest van de Hoge Raad uit 1883, de zogenaamde 'Groote Leugen'. Teneinde een einde te maken aan deze 'Groote Leugen' en in een poging het Nederlandse echtscheidingsrecht meer in lijn te brengen met het Duitse recht, heeft de Nederlandse secretaris-generaal voor Justitie, J.J. Schrieke, tussen 1942 en 1944 twee wijzigingsvoorstellen voorgelegd aan de Duitse autoriteiten welke destijds Nederland bezet hielden. Dit artikel analyseert beide wijzigingsvoorstellen en probeert een antwoord te geven op de vraag in hoeverre deze voorstellen het resultaat waren van een mogelijke invloed van het Nationaal Socialisme.
    ---
    Since the introduction of the Civil Code in 1838 one has repeatedly tried to extend the grounds for divorce. Although the grounds for divorce were not extended before 1971, the then existing situation, with only four grounds for divorce and a prohibition of divorce with mutual consent, was considered undesirable This sentiment became even stronger after the judgment of the Dutch Supreme Court of 1883, which became known as the 'Big Lie'. In order to stop this 'Big Lie' and in an attempt to bring Dutch divorce law more in line with German divorce law, the Dutch secretary-general of Justice, J.J. Schrieke, has presented the German authorities, which then occupied the Netherlands, with two draft revisions between 1942 and 1944. This article analyses both drafts and tries to answer the question to what extent these drafts were the result of a possible influence of National Socialism. This article is a summary of a part of the most important conclusions of the dissertation of the author, titled: 'National Socialist Family Law. The influence of National Socialism on marriage and divorce law in Germany and the Netherlands' defended at Maastricht University on 8 November 2012. A commercial edition of the dissertation is forthcoming.


Dr. Mariken Lenaerts LL.M., Ph.D.
Mariken Lenaerts obtained her doctorate at Maastricht University.
Artikel

Access_open Legal Dogmatics and Academic Education

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden legal dogmatics, theory design, academic education, empirical cycle
Auteurs Jan Struiksma
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Previously a model was developed whereby the evolution of dogmatic legal theory design can be made more explicit. This concerns, amongst other aspects, the application of the empirical cycle constructed by De Groot, which forms the final element of an evolution of the application of mundane knowledge to theory design. The starting point of this article is that this evolution must be ‘repeated’ during an academic study in empirical subjects. The objective is to investigate how this is done in the legal dogmatic education.


Jan Struiksma
Jan Struiksma is professor of administrative law at the Faculty of Law, Free University Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Alternative Methodologies: Learning Critique as a Skill

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden governmentality, methodology, method, skill
Auteurs Bal Sokhi-Bulley
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    How can we teach critical legal education? The article tackles this key question by focusing on the role of methodology in legal education and research. I argue that critical legal education requires marketing methodology as a ‘skill’, thereby freeing it from what students and researchers in Law often view as the negative connotations of ‘theory’. This skill requires exploring ‘alternative methodologies’ – those critical perspectives that depart from legal positivism and which Law traditionally regards as ‘peripheral’. As an example, the article explores the Foucauldian concept of governmentality as a useful methodological tool. The article also discusses the difference between theory, methodology and method, and reviews current academic contributions on law and method(ology). Ultimately, it suggests a need for a ‘revolt of conduct’ in legal education. Perhaps then we might hope for students that are not docile and disengaged (despite being successful lawyers) but, rather, able to nurture an attitude that allows for ‘thinking’ (law) critically.


Bal Sokhi-Bulley
Bal Sokhi-Bulley is Lecturer in Law atQueen’s University in Belfast.
Artikel

Access_open ‘I’d like to learn what hegemony means’

Teaching International Law from a Critical Angle

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2013
Trefwoorden Bildung, cultural hegemony, international law, teaching
Auteurs Christine E.J. Schwöbel-Patel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution explores the possibility of teaching international law in a critical fashion. I examine whether the training which is taking place at law schools is establishing and sustaining a cultural hegemony (a term borrowed from Antonio Gramsci). I ask whether the current focus on technical practice-oriented teaching is a condition which should be questioned, even disrupted? In my thoughts on reorientations of this culture, a central term is the German word Bildung. Bildung refers to knowledge and education as an end in itself (John Dewey) as well as an organic process (Hegel), and therefore incorporates a wider understanding than the English word ‘education’. In terms of international law, a notion of Bildung allows us to acknowledge the political nature of the discipline; it may even allow us to ‘politicize’ our students.


Christine E.J. Schwöbel-Patel
Christine E.J. Schwöbel-Patel is Lecturer in Law at University of Liverpool.

    Preventive interventions against terrorist attacks can be justified on legal and moral grounds. The Dutch broad-based approach against terrorism also addresses radicalizations processes. It is, however, hard to justify why a government in a liberal democracy should be allowed to intervene in processes of radicalization where danger to society is not obvious. A reason to justify intervention is when a (former) radical asks for help. Theories based on the ideas of Kant and Rawls also allow for intervention if an individual’s autonomy is diminished because he is member of a sect or under the spell of a charismatic leader. Other interventions with regard to (prevention of) radicalization cannot be justified by deontological theories such as Kant’s and Rawls’. Virtue ethics or teleology would, however, allow interventions but only if they are geared towards helping the individual in their quest to the good life. This justification allows for interventions that are, for example, focused on supporting individuals to critically reflect, reason and discuss about the good life and a just society. Based on the teleological justification constraints can be derived for preventive interventions with regard to radicalization or even deradicalisation. Notice that individuals cannot be forced to join these programs because there is no legal basis.


Anke van Gorp
Dr. ir. Anke van Gorp is onderzoeker en hogeschooldocent Ethiek en Veiligheid aan de Hogeschool Utrecht, Integrale Veiligheidskunde, Faculteit FMR. E-mail: anke.vangorp@hu.nl

Arnold Roosendaal
Mr. Arnold Roosendaal is onderzoeker bij TNO, afdeling Strategy and Policy for the Information Society.
Artikel

Blik naar het Noorden?

Een kenschets van het justitiële beleid in Scandinavië

Tijdschrift Justitiële verkenningen, Aflevering 8 2013
Auteurs P. Kruize
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article focuses on the question whether Dutch policy makers and researchers ought to look more often to Scandinavia for inspiration and less to the West (UK and USA). Scandinavian countries are also influenced by Anglo-American ideas about crime and justice, but at the same time the number of incarcerated persons has not changed dramatically while recidivism rates are low. Dutch policy makers and researcher do sometimes look at initiatives and practices in Scandinavian countries, most often Sweden. Dutch society shares many similarities with the Scandinavian welfare states and therefore it should be natural – according to the author – to benefit more often from Scandinavian experiences. Some suggestions are discussed in the article.


P. Kruize
Dr. Peter Kruize is associate professor bij de Juridische Faculteit van de Universiteit van Kopenhagen. Daarnaast is hij partner bij Ateno – bureau voor criminaliteitsanalyse – in Amsterdam.
Artikel

Henry Stimson en het Neurenberg Tribunaal

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Nuremberg Tribunal, international criminal law, Morgenthau plan, summary execution of war criminals
Auteurs Alex Jettinghoff
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    When the Allied victory over the Axis powers is becoming certain, American officials start making plans for the occupation of Germany. In the aftermath of the invasion in 1944, some of these plans are brought to the attention of the Secretary of the Treasury in Roosevelt’s war cabinet, Henry Morgenthau. These plans infuriate him, because he considers them too lenient on Germany, which in his opinion should be reduced to an agrarian economy after its Nazi leadership has been summarily executed. The President at first agrees with this line of action as do most of the members of his cabinet. The only one opposing these ideas is the Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, suggesting economic reconstruction and an international tribunal instead. His opposition seems in vain, when Roosevelt and Churchill publicly agree to this course of action towards Germany during a meeting in Quebec. But the ‘Morgenthau plan’ unravels when it is leaked to the press and it causes an uproar. Roosevelt fears for his re-election chances and hastily retreats. But he makes no decision on the issue and Stimson has to wait for his opportunity. It comes in the person of a new President: Harry Truman. He agrees to Stimson’s proposal for an international tribunal and this brings the United States on board of an allied majority for what is later to become the Nuremberg Tribunal.


Alex Jettinghoff
Alex Jettinghoff is als fellow verbonden aan het Instituut voor Rechtssociologie van de Rechtenfaculteit van Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Hij schreef recentelijk over het procederen van bedrijven, rechterlijke specialisatie en de wording van het Unified Patent System van de Europese Unie.
Artikel

Raphael Lemkin en de misdaad zonder naam

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Genocide Convention, human rights, public international law, United Nations, international tribunals, jurisdiction, campaigning
Auteurs Reyer Baas
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Could one imagine that up until the mid-1940s international treaties had been ratified on postal services, copyright protection, and whale hunting, but not on genocide? It was only after the Second World War that the deliberate and systematic destruction of groups was recognised as an international crime. There had not even been a name for this practice, which has existed since the beginning of humanity. The 1948 Genocide Convention, the first human rights treaty adopted by the United Nations, was a milestone in the international protection of human rights, although several tragedies have shown that mere law is not sufficient to relegate genocide to the scrapheap of history. The initiator of the Convention was not a very well-known man. This article is about the struggle of Raphael Lemkin, who had, with unflagging zeal, devoted his life to the elimination of genocide.


Reyer Baas
Reyer Baas is promovendus Rechtspleging aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen en bereidt een proefschrift voor over rechterlijke besluitvorming. Tevens is hij docent Algemene rechtswetenschap. Hij publiceerde onder andere: R. Baas e.a., Rechtspraak: samen of alleen, Den Haag: Raad voor de rechtspraak 2010.
Artikel

Derkje Hazewinkel-Suringa: moed en middenweg

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden First female Dutch law professor, anti-fascism, Dutch criminal law
Auteurs Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Derkje Hazewinkel-Suringa entered law studies only after marriage and fulfilling about fifteen years of motherhood duty. Once at the university however, she rapidly became a student-researcher, delivered a PhD dissertation on ownership transfer and was appointed as the first female law professor in 1932, at the age of 42. Her professorship was in a remarkably different field, namely criminal law. Twenty years later she published the Introduction to the Study of Criminal Law, which would become the basis for criminal law teaching in the Netherlands for decades. A major reason behind this success was that the book, emphasizing active study of the law rather than passive reproduction, coincided with the general sprit of the post war era. Besides her scholarly work in which balance and synthesis were the major features, Hazewinkel-Suringa was a very outspoken actor in matters political. In 1936, when virtually the whole country was trying to accommodate the rise of fascism in the mighty neighbouring country, she became member of an anti-fascism committee. In 1938 she wrote a plea to the minister of Justice to allow entry of German-Jewish children into the country. During the German occupation (1940-1945) she proposed to close the university because of the dismissal of Jewish professors. She continued her protests against the social mainstream after the war, e.g. writing against the reintroduction of the death penalty (primarily focused on collaborators with the German regime). Hazewinkel-Suringa’s acts of individual courage could not make a difference in the overall political atmosphere of these times.


Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen
Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen is hoogleraar Rechtspleging en voorzitter van het gelijknamige onderzoeksprogramma van het onderzoekscentrum Staat en Recht van de Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zij publiceerde in boeken en tijdschriften over de juridische beroepen en de legitimiteit van rechtspraak.
Artikel

Hugo Sinzheimer en de collectieve arbeidsovereenkomst

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden Labour relations, collective agreement, Sinzheimer
Auteurs Robert Knegt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The German lawyer / labour law professor Hugo Sinzheimer (1875-1945) has, in the first two decades of the twentieth century, contributed significantly to the legal recognition of the ‘collective labour agreement’. The imperative character of CLA provisions, now widely accepted all over the world, required a paradigmatic turn in the dominant private law perspective on labour relations. The paper tries to specify what made him able and prone to do this, both by reconstructing the legal and political discussion in Germany and the Netherlands and by relating elements of the process to social-scientific theories of institutional and intellectual innovation. I argue that his combination of commitments in various fields (legal practice, science, politics) allowed him to span the gap between the fields of labour relations and state law and to contribute to the constitutionalisation of labour relations.


Robert Knegt
Robert Knegt is als directeur onderzoek verbonden aan het Hugo Sinzheimer Instituut, centrum voor onderzoek van ‘arbeid en recht’ aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Hij doet daar onderzoek naar de praktijk van arbeidsrechtelijke regelingen (ontslagrecht, flexwerk, arbeidstijden) en werkt aan een bij uitstek interdisciplinair project over ‘langetermijnontwikkelingen in de regulering van arbeid’. In 2008 verscheen The employment contract as an exclusionary device (Antwerp-Oxford-Portland: Intersentia).

    In this interview with prominent representatives of the British Acas and the Belgian Social Mediators Service important developments in the ADR labour practice are discussed. In particular, the impact of the financial crisis and the ever advancing globalization process on the labour negotiating climate is the centre of attention.


Annie de Roo
Annie de Roo is hoofdredacteur van TMD, verbonden aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en mediator.

Rob Jagtenberg
Rob Jagtenberg is docent aan de Erasmus Universiteit te Rotterdam en verricht aldaar vergelijkend onderzoek naar mediation en conflictmanagement in Europa. Tevens is hij redacteur van TMD.
Article

Access_open Imagining the Rule of Law in Nineteenth-Century Britain: Liberal Society and the Dialectic of the Clan

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden clan, rule of law, Albert Venn Dicey, Walter Scott, legal memory
Auteurs Dr. Mark S. Weiner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this essay, I provide a historical and theoretical framework for understanding the imaginative relation between the liberal rule of law and the kin-based form of socio-legal organization I call ‘the rule of the clan’ – a classic example of law created ‘from below’. Specifically, I believe that a culturalist disciplinary perspective reveals that the modern liberal state and its more centralized rule of law always stand in an ironic, dialectical relation to the rule of the clan as a legal form. Liberal society, that is, nurtures itself through an anti-liberal utopian imaginary. This article provides an intellectual history backdrop for theorizing that dialectical relationship by examining two contrasting ways in which nineteenth-cen‍tu‍ry British intellectuals imagined the rule of law. Following the work of Charles Taylor and, more specifically in the legal field, Paul Kahn, my goal is to depict a social imaginary of modern liberalism that has been neglected within contemporary liberal theory – and, in doing so, pro‍vi‍de a way to appreciate the cultural foundations of liberal legality. The article considers the stories that nineteenth-century British intellectuals told about the relation between the rule of law and the rule of the clan as a way to think about the rule of law today. It thus tacks between three different shores: the world of legal pluralism (the rule of the clan), the world of nineteenth-cen‍tu‍ry British analysis of the rule of the clan and the contemporary relation between culture and modern liberal society.


Dr. Mark S. Weiner
Mark S. Weiner is author of Black Trials: Citizenship from the Beginnings of Slavery to the End of Caste (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004), recipient of the Silver Gavel Award of the American Bar Association, and Americans without Law: The Racial Boundaries of Citizenship (New York: New York University Press, 2006), winner of the President’s Book Award of the Social Science History Association. He received an A.B. in American Studies from Stanford University; a Ph.D. in American Studies from Yale University; and a J.D. from Yale Law School. He blogs at Worlds of Law (www.worldsoflaw.com).
Article

Access_open A Turn to Legal Pluralism in Rule of Law Promotion?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden legal pluralism, rule of law promotion, legal reform, customary law, non-state legal systems, donor policy
Auteurs Dr.mr Ronald Janse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the past 25 years, international organizations, NGOs and (mostly Western) states have spent considerable energy and resources on strengthening and reforming legal systems in developing countries. The results of these efforts have generally been disappointing, despite occasional successes. Among donors, one of most popular explanations of this failure in recent years is that rule of law promotion has wrongly focused almost exclusively on strengthening the formal legal system. Donors have therefore decided to 'engage' with informal justice systems. The turn to legal plu‍ra‍lism is to be welcomed for various reasons. But it is also surprising and worrisome. It is surprising because legal pluralism in developing countries was a fact of life before rule of law promotion began. What made donors pursuing legal reform blind to this reality for so long? It is worrisome because it is not self-evident that the factors which have contributed to such cognitive blindness have disappeared overnight. Are donors really ready to refocus their efforts on legal pluralism and 'engage' with informal justice systems? This paper, which is based on a review of the literature on donor engamenet with legal pluralism in so-called conflict affected and fragile states, is about these questions. It argues that 7 factors have been responsible for donor blindness regarding legal pluralism. It questions whether these factors have been addressed.


Dr.mr Ronald Janse
Ronald Janse is Associate Professor of Law, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Article

Access_open At the Crossroads of National and European Union Law. Experiences of National Judges in a Multi-level Legal Order

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3/4 2013
Trefwoorden national judges, legal pluralism, application of EU law, legal consciousness, supremacy and direct effect of EU law
Auteurs Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The notion and theory of legal pluralism have been witnessing an increasing interest on part of scholars. The theory that originates from the legal anthropological studies and is one of the major topical streams in the realm of socio-legal studies slowly but steady started to become a point of departure for other disciplines. Unavoidably it has also gained attention from the scholars in the realm of the law of the European Union. It is the aim of the present article to illustrate the legal reality in which the law of the Union and the national laws coexist and intertwine with each other and, subsequently, to provide some insight on the manner national judges personally construct their own understanding of this complex legal architecture and the problems they come across in that respect. In that sense, the present article not only illustrates the new, pluralistic legal environment that came into being with the founding of the Communities, later the European Union, but also adds another dimension to this by presenting selected, empirical data on how national judges in several Member States of the EU individually perceive, adapt to, experience and make sense of this reality of overlapping and intertwining legal orders. Thus, the principal aim of this article is to illustrate how the pluralistic legal system works in the mind of a national judge and to capture the more day-to-day legal reality by showing how the law works on the ground through the lived experiences of national judges.


Urszula Jaremba Ph.D.
Urszula Jaremba, PhD, assistant professor at the Department of European Union Law, School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam. I am grateful to the editors of this Special Issue: Prof. Dr. Sanne Taekema and Dr. Wibo van Rossum as well as to the two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. I am also indebted to Dr. Tobias Nowak for giving me his consent to use the data concerning the Dutch and German judges in this article. This article is mostly based on a doctoral research project that resulted in a doctoral manuscript titled ‘Polish Civil Judges as European Union Law Judges: Knowledge, Experiences and Attitudes’, defended on the 5th of October 2012.

Wibo van Rossum

Sanne Taekema

    This article seeks to critically analyse the European Commission's Proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes (COM (2011) 126). It focuses upon the coordination of the Proposal's provisions on jurisdiction and applicable law with the parallel provisions contained in other related EU private international law instruments, namely those relating to divorce (Brussels II bis and Rome III) and succession (Succession Regulation). In doing so, the article adopts a 'stress-test' approach, presenting scenarios in which interaction between these related instruments takes place. The compositions and circumstances of the fictitious couples in these scenarios are varied in order to fully illustrate the potential consequences of the interplay between the instruments. This article seeks to assess the extent to which (in)consistency exists between the current and proposed EU private international instruments and, by evaluating this interaction through a number of norms, how identified inconsistencies impact upon international couples' legal relationships. In order to ensure the analysis remains as up to date as possible, the article will also take into account relevant changes introduced in the latest revised versions of the Proposal.


Jacqueline Gray LL.M.
Jacqueline Gray studied law at the University of Glasgow (2006-2010) and European law at the Leiden University (2010-2011). Following this, she undertook a four-month internship at the Molengraaff Institute for Private Law and five-month traineeship at the European Parliament in Brussels. She is now a PhD student at the Molengraaff Institute for Private Law, where she is writing her dissertation on party autonomy in the EU private international law relating to family matters and succession.

Pablo Quinzá Redondo LL.M.
Pablo Quinzá Redondo, a research scholar funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, is currently undertaking a PhD at the University of Valencia. His specialisation concerns 'The europeanisation of matrimonial property regimes from a substantive and private international law perspective'. Prior to commencing his PhD, he completed undergraduate degrees in both Law and Administration and Business management (2004- 2010), as well as a Master’s degree in Company Law (2010-2012), at the University of Valencia.
Artikel

Remission in de nieuwe arbitragewet

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging, Aflevering 4 2013
Trefwoorden Remission, Terugverwijzing, Vernietiging, Herroeping, Arbitrage
Auteurs Mr. N. Peters en Mr. B. van Zelst
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In dit artikel gaan de auteurs in op de voorgestelde mogelijkheid van remission in de nieuwe arbitragewet. Daarbij signaleren zij een aantal mogelijke onduidelijkheden en discussiepunten. Zij trachten daar antwoorden op te geven en stellen een aantal oplossingen voor. De auteurs concluderen dat de mogelijkheid van remission bijdraagt aan een efficiënte(re) procesvoering. Daarom valt zij toe te juichen.


Mr. N. Peters
Mr. N. Peters is advocaat bij Banning N.V. alsmede docent en buitenpromovendus aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Mr. B. van Zelst
Mr. Van Zelst is docent aan de Radboud Universiteit.
Artikel

EU-rechtelijk gestructureerd nationaal mededingingstoezicht

Nationale institutionele autonomie steeds meer een illusie?

Tijdschrift Markt & Mededinging, Aflevering 5 2013
Trefwoorden Effectiviteit, procedurele rechten, EVRM, nationale institutionele autonomie, Verordening 2003/1/EG
Auteurs Dr. P.J.M.M. van Cleynenbreugel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Hoewel de lidstaten formeel autonoom blijven bij het inrichten van nationale mededingingsautoriteiten, mag de constitutieve rol van het Europese Unierecht bij de organisatie en (her-)structurering van nationaal mededingingstoezicht niet onderschat worden. Geruggesteund door de vereisten van een ‘eerlijk proces’, kan het Hof van Justitie rechtstreeks de autonomie van de lidstaten beperken met het oog op de inrichting van een meer effectief nationaal mededingingstoezicht bij de toepassing van Europees mededingingsrecht. Uit de beperkte bestaande Europese rechtspraak kunnen in dat verband drie organisatorische modellen van toezicht gedistilleerd worden in overeenstemming waarmee nationale mededingingstoezichthouders zich mogen organiseren op grond van EU-recht.


Dr. P.J.M.M. van Cleynenbreugel
Pieter Van Cleynenbreugel is als universitair docent verbonden aan het Europa Instituut, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, Universiteit Leiden. Dit artikel is gebaseerd op (een hoofdstuk van) het proefschrift tot het verkrijgen van de graad van doctor in de rechten dat de auteur op 3 september 2013 succesvol verdedigde aan de KU Leuven (België) en dat als titel draagt ‘From shared competences to institutional heteronomy. The constitutional architecture of supranationally structured market supervision’. Promotor van het proefschrift was prof. dr. Wouter Devroe, co-promotor prof. dr. Koen Geens.
Artikel

Kartelschade in Nederland, een eerste aanzet

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 9 2013
Trefwoorden privaatrechtelijk handhaving, passing-on, voordeelverrekening, schadevergoeding, artikel 101 VwEU
Auteurs Mr. B. Braat
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De uitspraak in eerste aanleg in de zaak TenneT/ABB geeft er een beeld van hoe in Nederland in rechte met kartelclaims wordt omgegaan. De Rechtbank Oost-Nederland komt tot interessante conclusies over de aansprakelijkheid van entiteiten behorend tot het concern van een kartelovertreder en de mogelijkheid van een zogenoemd passing-on verweer. De uitspraak lijkt voor kartelovertreders niet gunstig.
    Rb. Oost-Nederland 16 januari 2013, ECLI:NL:RBONE:2013:BZ0403


Mr. B. Braat
Mr. B. (Bram) Braat is advocaat bij CMS en promovendus aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen (onderwerp: civiele handhaving van het mededingingsrecht en het clementiebeleid).
Artikel

Access_open The Meaning of the Presumption of Innocence for Pre-trial Detention

An Empirical Approach

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden pre-trial detention practice, presumption of guilt, incapacitation, presumption of innocence
Auteurs Lonneke Stevens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The presumption of innocence (PoI) is considered to be an important principle for regulating pre-trial detention. The idea is that pre-trial detention should be a last resort. However, pre-trial detention practice demonstrates that pre-trial detention does not function on the basis of a presumption of innocence but rather from a presumption of guilt and dangerousness. It must be concluded that, with regard to pre-trial detention, the PoI has a rather limited normative effect.


Lonneke Stevens
Lonneke Stevens is Associate Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure at VU University Amsterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 60 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.