Zoekresultaat: 6 artikelen

x
Jaar 2012 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

Access_open Relational Jurisprudence

Vulnerability between Fact and Value

Tijdschrift Law and Method, 2012
Trefwoorden fact/value separation, vulnerability, relational jurisprudence, empirical methodology, normative methodology
Auteurs Maksymilian Del Mar
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Relational jurisprudence is an approach to law that situates it in five relational contexts: (1) relations between individuals; (2) relations between individuals and communities; (3) relations between communities; (4) relations between individuals or communities on the one hand, and institutions on the other; and (5) relations between institutions. Thus, part of what makes relational jurisprudence distinctive is its object: the study of law in the context of certain relations, including investigating what factors affect and influence the quality of those relations. Relational jurisprudence is also distinctive, however, in its method. One of its methodological commitments is to avoid the dichotomy, without losing the benefits of a distinction, between facts and values. In trying to avoid this dichotomy, the approach identifies and uses devices that have both factual and evaluative dimensions, called here ‘factual-evaluative complexes’. These devices are then used to investigate the quality of different relations. One such device is ‘vulnerability’. The argument of this paper is that at least some of law can be profitably understood as managing vulnerability, i.e. recognising some vulnerabilities as worthy of protection and others not, or balancing the protection of different vulnerabilities in different relational contexts. Avoiding the dichotomy while retaining the usefulness of the distinction between facts and values in the above-outlined way means that we ought to employ a mix of empirical and normative methodology in the study of law.


Maksymilian Del Mar
Maksymilian Del Mar is lecturer in Legal and Social Philosophy, Department of Law, Queen Mary University of London.
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 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.
Artikel

Access_open Grootayatollah Fadlallahs boodschap aan de Nederlandse moslims

‘Integratie is een religieuze plicht’

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden Fadlallah, integratie, sjiisme, Nederland
Auteurs Joseph Alagha, Huub Damoiseaux en Arnout van Ree
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The authors endeavour to provide new insights on the continuing Dutch debate on ‘immigration’, ‘integration’, and the assumed clash between Islam and Dutch norms, values, and culture. The late Lebanese ayatollah Fadlallah (1935-2010) specifically addressed the Dutch situation in 2005-2010. The article is based on interviews with him, his Dutch followers, and literary sources. It demonstrates that Fadlallah and his followers hold liberal views on contentious issues such as women’s rights, veiling, integration, and condemn violence and terrorism as exemplified by 9/11. On these grounds, the authors question the supposed incompatibility between Islam and integration, arguing that the precepts of practice cast doubt on the validity of such a contention.


Joseph Alagha
Dr. J. Alagha is voormalig docent Midden Oosten Studies aan het Leiden University Institute for Area Studies (LIAS). Hij is de auteur van drie peer-reviewed boeken: Hizbullah’s Identity Construction (2011), Hizbullah’s Documents (2011) en The Shifts in Hizbullah’s Ideology (2006): http://www.hum.leidenuniv.nl/lucis/lucis-signaleert/books-alagha.html. jalagha2001@yahoo.com.

Huub Damoiseaux
Mr. drs. H. Damoiseaux studeerde Rechten (UU) en Politicologie (UvA). huubdamoiseaux@gmail.com.

Arnout van Ree
A. van Ree is BA Geschiedenis (scriptie over Hizbullah en diens integratie in de politieke arena van 1991 tot 2009) en MA-student Area Studies: Asia and the Middle East aan de Universiteit Leiden. ptsa.van.ree@gmail.com.
Artikel

Access_open De Drittwirkung van grondrechten

Retorisch curiosum of vaandel van een paradigmatische omwenteling in ons rechtsbestel?

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden Drittwirkung, horizontal effect of human rights, constitutionalisation of private law
Auteurs Stefan Somers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article discusses whether the horizontal effect of human rights marks a new paradigm in legal systems or is merely a new style in legal rhetoric. In doing so, much attention is paid to the differences between direct and indirect horizontal effect. Departing from social contract theory the article explains that the protection of human right values in horizontal relations is an essential feature of modern constitutionalism. It also analyses whether these values in horizontal relations should be protected by private law or by human rights. This question is looked at from a substantial, a methodological and an institutional perspective. In the end, because of institutional power balancing, the article argues in favor of an indirect horizontal effect of human rights.


Stefan Somers
Stefan Somers is a researcher at the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies at the VUB (Free University of Brussels) and prepares a PhD on the relationship between human rights and tort law.
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.