Zoekresultaat: 68 artikelen

x
Jaar 2017 x
Artikel

Datamining in een veranderende wereld van opsporing en vervolging

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Bijzonder Strafrecht & Handhaving, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Strafprocesrecht, Strafrecht, Art. 3 Politiewet 2012, Datamining, Privacy
Auteurs Mr. dr. S. Brinkhoff
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Datamining wordt meer en meer als opsporingsmethode ingezet. Onderzocht wordt of de huidige wettelijke grondslagen, mede gelet op jurisprudentie van het EHRM, wel voldoen voor de inzet van deze methode. Een handvat wordt geboden voor een wettelijke regeling.


Mr. dr. S. Brinkhoff
Mr. dr. S. Brinkhoff is als universitair docent straf(proces)recht verbonden aan de vaksectie Straf(proces)recht en Criminologie van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Article

Access_open The Questionable Legitimacy of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden base erosion and profit shifting, OECD, G20, legitimacy, international tax reform
Auteurs Sissie Fung
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The global financial crisis of 2008 and the following public uproar over offshore tax evasion and corporate aggressive tax planning scandals gave rise to unprecedented international cooperation on tax information exchange and coordination on corporate tax reforms. At the behest of the G20, the OECD developed a comprehensive package of ‘consensus-based’ policy reform measures aimed to curb base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) by multinationals and to restore fairness and coherence to the international tax system. The legitimacy of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project, however, has been widely challenged. This paper explores the validity of the legitimacy concerns raised by the various stakeholders regarding the OECD/G20 BEPS Project.


Sissie Fung
Ph.D. Candidate at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and independent tax policy consultant to international organisations, including the Asian Development Bank.
Article

Access_open The Peer Review Process of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes

A Critical Assessment on Authority and Legitimacy

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information, exercise of regulatory authority, due process requirements, peer review reports, legitimacy
Auteurs Leo E.C. Neve
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Global Forum on transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes has undertaken peer reviews on the implementation of the global standard of exchange of information on request, both from the perspective of formalities available and from the perspective of actual implementation. In the review reports Global Forum advises jurisdictions on required amendments of regulations and practices. With these advices, the Global Forum exercises regulatory authority. The article assesses the legitimacy of the exercise of such authority by the Global Forum and concludes that the exercise of such authority is not legitimate for the reason that the rule of law is abused by preventing jurisdictions to adhere to due process rules.


Leo E.C. Neve
Leo Neve is a doctoral student at the Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Legality of the World Bank’s Informal Decisions to Expand into the Tax Field, and Implications of These Decisions for Its Legitimacy

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden World Bank, legality, legitimacy, global tax governance, tax policy and tax administration reforms
Auteurs Uyanga Berkel-Dorlig
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The emergence of global tax governance was triggered by common tax problems, which are now still being faced by international society of nation-states. In the creation of this framework, international institutions have been playing a major role. One of these institutions is the World Bank (Bank). However, those who write about the virtues and vices of the main creators of the framework usually disregard the Bank. This article, therefore, argues that this disregard is not justified because the Bank has also been playing a prominent role. Since two informal decisions taken in the past have contributed to this position of the Bank, the article gives in addition to it answers to the following two related questions: whether these informal decisions of the Bank were legal and if so, what implications, if any, they have for the Bank’s legitimacy.


Uyanga Berkel-Dorlig
Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Tax Law, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Drs. Yinka Tempelman
Yinka Tempelman is programmamanager kwaliteit bij het bureau van de Raad voor de rechtspraak en adviseur programma Organisatie van Kennis

Mr. Jasper van den Beld
Jasper van den Beld is rechterlijk bestuurslid bij de Rechtbank Rotterdam en landelijk programmamanager programma Organisatie van Kennis.
Artikel

Wetsvoorstel collectieve schadevergoedingsactie: een oplossing voor welk probleem ook alweer?

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Vergoeding Personenschade, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden wetsvoorstel collectieve schadevergoedingsactie, massaschade, schadevergoeding, collectieve actie, collectieve rechtshandhaving
Auteurs Prof. mr. I.N. Tzankova
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Het wetsvoorstel werd ingevoerd als gevolg van de motie Dijksma, die de positie van belangenorganisaties in collectieve schadevergoedingsacties moest verbeteren. Terwijl het systeem van de exclusieve belangenbehartiger in combinatie met het voorgestelde opt-outregime vroeg in de procedure verweerders een grote dienst bewijst, doet het wetsvoorstel weinig voor de adequate financiering van collectieve acties, waardoor een tekort aan rechtsbescherming dreigt. De auteur pleit voor een wettelijke introductie van de ‘common fund’, gekoppeld aan de bevoegdheid voor de rechter om de ‘success fee’ voor de procesfinanciers te bepalen. Dit dient wel te worden geflankeerd door een passende opleiding en training van de rechters die over collectieve acties oordelen. Ook dient de registratieplicht te worden uitgebreid met rapportageplicht aan het einde van een collectieve actie of schikking.


Prof. mr. I.N. Tzankova
Prof. mr. I.N. Tzankova is hoogleraar Global Dispute Resolution and Mass Claims aan Tilburg University en zelfstandig adviseur.
ECJ Court Watch

ECJ 14 September 2017, case C-168/16 and C-169/16 (Ryanair), Private international law

Sandra Nogueira and Others – v – Crewlink Ireland Ltd and Miguel José Moreno Osacar – v – Ryanair Designated Activity Company

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Private international law
Samenvatting

    When determining the place from which airline cabin crewmembers habitually carry out their work, the concept of ‘home base’ is a significant indicator.

    The highest administrative court in the Netherlands has delivered a razor-sharp ruling on the intra-community service provision set out in Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). This concerns ‘new’ EU-nationals who are still under transitional measures with regard to access to the labour markets of ‘old’ EU Member States. The judgment was preceded by a request from the Chairman to a State Councillor Advocate General to deliver his opinion on various aspects of punitive administrative law practice in the Netherlands. Both the opinion and the judgment are a welcome clarification and addition (or even correction) on the practice.


Othmar K. Traber
Othmar K. Traber is a partner at Ahlers & Vogel Rechtsanwalte PartG mbB in Bremen, www.ahlers-vogel.com.

    A clause in a collective bargaining agreement stipulating that overtime premiums for part time employees are only payable if their monthly working hours exceed those of a full-time employee is not discriminatory.


Paul Schreiner
Paul Schreiner is a partner with Luther Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH in Essen, www.luther-lawfirm.com.

    The highest administrative court in the Netherlands has delivered a razor-sharp ruling on the intra-community service provision set out in Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). This concerns ‘new’ EU-nationals who are still under transitional measures with regard to access to the labour markets of ‘old’ EU Member States. The judgment was preceded by a request from the Chairman to a State Councillor Advocate General to deliver his opinion on various aspects of punitive administrative law practice in the Netherlands. Both the opinion and the judgment are a welcome clarification and addition (or even correction) on the practice.


Bart J. Maes
Bart J. Maes is a partner at Maes Staudt Advocaten N.V. in Eindhoven, the Netherlands (www.maes-staudt.nl).
Article

Access_open The Right to Same-Sex Marriage: Assessing the European Court of Human Rights’ Consensus-Based Analysis in Recent Judgments Concerning Equal Marriage Rights

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden same-sex marriage, gay marriage, European consensus, margin of appreciation, consensus-based analysis by the ECtHR
Auteurs Masuma Shahid
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This contribution assesses the consensus-based analysis and reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights in recent judgments concerning equal marriage rights and compares it to the Court’s past jurisprudence on European consensus and the margin of appreciation awarded to Member States regarding the issue of equal marriage rights. The contribution aims to analyse whether there is a parallel to be seen between the rapid global trend of legalisation of same-sex marriage and the development or evolution of the case law of the ECtHR on the same topic. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the Court’s consensus-based analysis is problematic for several reasons and provides possible alternative approaches to the balancing of the Court between, on the one hand, protecting rights of minorities (in this case same-sex couples invoking equal marriage rights) under the European Convention on Human Rights and, on the other hand, maintaining its credibility, authority and legitimacy towards Member States that might disapprove of the evolving case law in the context of same-sex relationships. It also offers insights as to the future of European consensus in the context of equal marriage rights and ends with some concluding remarks.


Masuma Shahid
Lecturer, Department of International and European Union Law, Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Religious Freedom of Members of Old and New Minorities: A Double Comparison

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden ECtHR, UNHRC, religious manifestations, religious minorities, empirical analysis
Auteurs Fabienne Bretscher
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Confronted with cases of restrictions of the right to manifest religious beliefs of new religious minorities formed by recent migration movements, the ECtHR and the UNHRC seem to opt for different interpretations and applications of this right, as recent conflicting decisions show. Based on an empirical legal analysis of the two bodies’ decisions on individual complaints, this article finds that these conflicting decisions are part of a broader divergence: While the UNHRC functions as a protector of new minorities against States’ undue interference in their right to manifest their religion, the ECtHR leaves it up to States how to deal with religious diversity brought by new minorities. In addition, a quantitative analysis of the relevant case law showed that the ECtHR is much less likely to find a violation of the right to freedom of religion in cases brought by new religious minorities as opposed to old religious minorities. Although this could be a hint towards double standards, a closer look at the examined case law reveals that the numerical differences can be explained by the ECtHR’s weaker protection of religious manifestations in the public as opposed to the private sphere. Yet, this rule has an important exception: Conscientious objection to military service. By examining the development of the relevant case law, this article shows that this exception bases on a recent alteration of jurisprudence by the ECtHR and that there are similar prospects for change regarding other religious manifestations in the public sphere.


Fabienne Bretscher
PhD candidate at the University of Zurich.
Article

Access_open An Empirical Study of the Voting Pattern of Judges of the International Court of Justice (2005-2016)

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden voting pattern, ICJ judges, empirical research
Auteurs Xuechan Ma en Shuai Guo
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Statute of the International Court of Justice stipulates that judges shall exercise their powers impartially. We question the practicability of this statement and examine whether the voting pattern of the judges are biased. In this light, empirical research is conducted on cases adjudicated from 2005 to 2016. We find strong evidence that (1) judges favour their home States or appointing States; and (2) judges favour States that speak same majority language with their home States.


Xuechan Ma
Xuechan Ma, Ph.D. candidate at Leiden University, LL.M. and LL.B. at Peking University. Email address: x.ma@law.leidenuniv.nl.

Shuai Guo
Shuai Guo, Ph.D. candidate at Leiden University, LL.M. and LL.B. at China University of Political Science and Law. Email address: s.guo@law.leidenuniv.nl.

Annie de Roo
Annie de Roo is associate professor of ADR and comparative law at Erasmus University Law School in Rotterdam, editor-in-chief of TMD, and vice chair of the exams committee of the Mediators Federation of the Netherlands MFN. She has published extensively on mediation and has inter alia been a Rapporteur three times for the European Commission on the use of mediation in employment disputes.

Rob Jagtenberg
Rob Jagtenberg is senior research fellow at Erasmus University and has published frequently on the relationship between public and private justice. He has been involved in research commissioned by the Worldbank, the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary, and various Dutch Ministries including the MoJ funded national project on court-connected mediation.
Artikel

Mediation case law in Germany – an overview

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2017
Trefwoorden Case law, Germany, Voluntariness, Confidentiality, Neutrality
Auteurs Ulla Gläßer
Auteursinformatie

Ulla Gläßer
Prof. Dr. Ulla Gläßer, LL.M., holds a full professorship of mediation, conflict management and procedural theory at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder)/Germany. She is academic director of the Institute for Conflict Management and the postgraduate, interdisciplinary Master’s Program on Mediation at the European University. Ms Gläßer is teaching mediation, negotiation and conflict management skills at various universities and numerous other institutions in Germany and abroad. She has published broadly on mediation methodology, the legal framework of mediation, quality assurance of mediation and other ADR procedures and the establishment of mediation and ADR procedures in different realms of society. She also is editor of two Publication Series on Mediation and Conflict Management and a comprehensive commentary on the German Mediation Act and corresponding relevant regulation. As a practical mediator and facilitator, Ms Gläßer supports dispute resolution and decision making processes within or between organisations/corporations.

Bryan Clark
Bryan Clark is a Professor and former Head of School in the Law School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK. He is a socio-legal scholar and commercial lawyer with interests particularly in the fields of mediation and its interaction with the law, courts, civil justice and the workings of judges and lawyers. He has published widely in these fields and presented a wide range of papers at national and international conferences and seminars. He is Chair of the Accreditation and Validation of Relationships Scotland, Academic Committee Member of the English Civil Mediation Council, Board Member of the Asian Mediation Centre and former Board Member of Scottish Mediation.

    This paper discusses three approaches that can be helpful in the area of comparative rights jurisprudence, oriented in reference to three different kinds of studies that are possible in that area. To a large extent the methods for a comparative legal research depend on the research question and the goal of the researcher. First, a comparative law study may focus on the sociocultural context that led to the elaboration of differences or similarities in the protection of rights. Second, a comparative law approach can be a normative enterprise. It can focus on engaging in a philosophical analysis enlightened by the differences or similarities in the regulation of rights, in order to propose concrete solutions for the regulation of a right. Third, a comparative law approach can combine both elements of the two previously mentioned approaches. The paper discusses the challenges that the researcher faces in her attempt to use these methodologies and how these challenges can be overcome. The law as a normative discipline has its own constraints of justifiability. If what motivates a comparative law study is the search for principles of justice the researcher needs to persuade that her methodological approach serves her aim.


Ioanna Tourkochoriti
School of Law, NUI Galway, Ireland.

    It is often claimed in the media and in political and academic debates that more law nurtures more research, which in turn should generate more information. However, the question researchers are left with is: What does this mean for comparative law and its methods? This paper takes the context of European consumer sales law as an example of the web of rules applicable at both European and national level. In this context, the main idea behind this article is that looking at law and research as data to be built upon and used in further analysis can revolutionise the way in which legal research is understood. This is because current research methods in European consumer sales law fall short of systematically analysing the essential weaknesses of the current regulation system. In this contribution, I argue that the volume of regulation in European consumer law is large enough for it to be considered Big Data and analysed in a way that can harness its potential in this respect. I exemplify this claim with a case-study consisting in the setting up of a Convergence Index that maps the converging effect of harmonizing policies adopted by the European legislator in the field of


Catalina Goanta
Assistant Professor of Private Law, Maastricht Law School, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.

    The nexus between religion and law is an important subject of comparative law. This paper, however, finds that the majority of comparative theorists rely on the immanent frame; that legal legitimacy can and should be separated from any objective truth or moral norm. But the fact of the matter is many constitutional systems were founded based on a complicated mixture between the transcendent and immanent frame. Whereas in the immanent frame, human actions are considered self-constituting, in the transcendent frame, human actions were judged in light of their correspondence to higher, divine laws and purposes.
    This article argues that it is not sufficient for comparative theorists to offer a perspective from the immanent frame. Comparative theorists in law and religion should understand at least basic religious doctrines and know how to systematize those doctrines. In other words, comparative theorist of law and religion should work within the transcendent frame. By using a transcendent frame, comparative theorists will be able to excavate the underlying structure of religion, and so they will understand better how theological ideas influence law. Furthermore, this paper will also present a thought experiment in applying the transcendent frame in comparative constitutional studies.


Stefanus Hendrianto
Stefanus Hendrianto is a scholar at Boston College, School of Theology and Ministry. In recent years, he has been a visiting professor at Santa Clara University School of Law (2013-2015) and a guest scholar at the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame (2015-2016). He holds a Ph.D. degree from the School of Law, University of Washington, Seattle and LLM degree from Utrecht University, Netherlands, in addition to his LLB degree from Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia.

    Comparative methodology is an important and a widely used method in the legal literature. This method is important inter alia to search for alternative national rules and acquire a deeper understanding of a country’s law. According to a survey of over 500 Dutch legal scholars, 61 per cent conducts comparative research (in some form). However, the methodological application of comparative research generally leaves much to be desired. This is particularly true when it comes to case selection. This applies in particular to conceptual and dogmatic research questions, possibly also allowing causal explanations for differences between countries. This article suggests that the use of an interdisciplinary research design could be helpful, and Hofstede’s cultural-psychological dimensions can offer a solution to improve the methodology of selection criteria.


Dave van Toor
D.A.G. van Toor, PhD LLM BSc works as a researcher and lecturer in Criminal (Procedural) Law and Criminology at the Universität Bielefeld.
Toont 1 - 20 van 68 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.