Zoekresultaat: 8 artikelen

x
Jaar 2015 x
Artikel

Access_open Institutional Religious Accommodation in the US and Europe

Comparative Reflections from a Liberal Perspective

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden European jurisprudence, freedom of religion, religious-based associations, religious accommodation
Auteurs Patrick Loobuyck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Jean Cohen argues that recent US Supreme Court decisions about institutional accommodation are problematic. She rightly points out that justice and the liberal concept of freedom of consciousness cannot do the work in Hobby Lobby and Hosanna-Tabor: what does the work is a medieval political-theological conception of church immunity and sovereignty. The first part of this commentary sketches how the autonomy of churches and religious associations can be considered from a liberal perspective, avoiding the pitfall of the medieval idea of libertas ecclesiae based on church immunity and sovereignty. The second part discusses the European jurisprudence about institutional accommodation claims and concludes that until now the European Court of Human Rights is more nuanced and its decisions are more in line with liberalism than the US Jurisprudence.


Patrick Loobuyck
Patrick Loobuyck is Associate Professor of Religion and Worldviews at the Centre Pieter Gillis of the University of Antwerp and Guest Professor of Political Philosophy at Ghent University.

    Pragmatism has become an established academic topic focused on an accepted canon of works and a number of seminal authors. There is something ironic about this fixation of the Pragmatist tradition. An anticipation of transience and embrace of adaptability runs through many of the classic works of Pragmatism. Nevertheless, there seems to be a tendency to fixate Pragmatism and freeze it in its classic iterations, especially with respect to its philosophy of scientific inquiry. The article seeks to retrieve the dynamics and adaptability the classical Pragmatists built into their notion of scientific inquiry. It seeks to illustrate the need for such flexibility with recent developments in the field of economics. When the financial crisis struck in 2007-2008, this involved more than the insolvency of a number of large banks. The crisis, at the very least, also involved the bankruptcy of a dominant economic model. It raised questions about the rationality of markets and the widespread faith in soft-touch regulation. It cast doubt on decades of neo-classical economic dogma that counseled small government, privatisation, and free markets. Neo-classical economics did not float free from other concerns. It informed notions about the role of the state, the limits of public policy, and the scope of democratic decision-making. Indeed, faith in rational, self-correcting markets affected debates in disparate disciplines like law, political science, philosophy, ethics, and history in many non-trivial ways. Hence, the financial crisis is also a crisis of scientific research.


Wouter de Been
Wouter de Been is assistant professor at the Erasmus School of Law, the Netherlands.

    In een aantal recente zaken spreken het Hof van Justitie en een aantal advocaten-generaal zich wederom uit over de doorwerking van het recht van de Wereldhandelsorganisatie (WTO) in de Europese rechtsorde. Hoewel de deur voor ‘rechtstreeks effect’ gesloten blijft, is iedere Europese rechter onder het principe van de ‘verdragsconforme interpretatie’ verplicht om het Europees recht voor zover mogelijk uit te leggen in lijn met relevante regels van WTO-recht. Aldus bestaat er wel degelijk een mogelijkheid voor particuliere partijen om zich op het WTO-recht te beroepen en de rechter, althans de Europese, geeft daaraan steeds vaker (expliciet of impliciet) gehoor.
    HvJ 14 april 2011, gevoegde zaken C-288/09 en C-289/09, BskyB and Pace/The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs, ECLI:EU:C:2011:248
    HvJ 22 november 2012, gevoegde zaken C-320/11, C-330/11, C-382/11, en C-383/11, Digitalnet OOD, ECLI:EU:C:2012:745
    HvJ 27 september 2007, zaak C-351/04, Ikea Wholesale Ltd./Commissioners of Customs & Excise, ECLI:EU:C:2007:547;
    HvJ 27 juni 2013, gevoegde zaken C-457/11 tot en met C-460/11, VG Wort/Kyocera e.a., C-457/11 tot en met C-460/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013:426
    HvJ 10 april 2014, zaak C-435/12, ACI Adam e.a., ECLI:EU:C:2014:254
    HvJ 3 juni 2008, zaak C-308/06, Intertanko e.a./Secretary of State for Transport, ECLI:EU:C:2008:312
    HvJ 13 januari 2015, gevoegde zaken C-404/12 P en C-405/12 P, Raad en Commissie/Stichting Natuur en Milieu en Pesticide Action Network Europe, ECLI:EU:C:2015:5
    HvJ 13 januari 2015, gevoegde zaken C-401/12 P tot C-403/12 P, Raad e.a./Vereniging Milieudefensie en Stichting Stop Luchtverontreiniging Utrecht, ECLI:EU:C:2015:4
    HvJ 9 september 2008, gevoegde zaken C-120/06 en C-121/06, Fabbrica italiana accumulatori motocarri Montecchio SpA (FIAMM) e.a./Raad en Commissie, ECLI:EU:C:2008:476
    HvJ 14 juni 2012, zaak C-533/10, Compagnie international pour la vente à distance (CIVAD) SA/Receveur des douanes de Roubaix e.a., ECLI:EU:C:2012:347


Mr. N. van den Broek
Mr. N. (Naboth) van den Broek is partner bij WilmerHale, Washington DC/Brussel en Adjunct Professor aan de Georgetown University Law Center.

    The article considers the role of the liberal public-private divide in protecting religious minorities against national-majoritarian assault. It links the defence of the public-private divide to liberal neutrality and argues that it rests on two distinct propositions: that the distinction between the ’public sphere’ and the ’private sphere’ is a meaningful way to cognize and structure modern pluralistic societies; and that there is a meaningful way to distinguish what is or ought to be ‘public’ from what is or ought to be ‘private.’ While the latter proposition cannot be defended on grounds of liberal neutrality, the former proposition provides the institutional framework for conducting liberal politics by enabling the negotiation of the public and the private between national majorities and religious minorities as members of the same political community.


Daniel Augenstein
Daniel Augenstein is Associate Professor at the Department of European and International Public Law at Tilburg University.
Artikel

Access_open Goed geregeld

Geestelijke verzorging bij justitie

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Geestelijke verzorging, justitie, scheiding van kerk en staat, godsdienstvrijheid
Auteurs Dr. mr. Ryan van Eijk
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Ryan van Eijk reacts on a previously in this periodical published article on prison chaplaincy in the Netherlands. This article argued that the growing religious individualisation as well as a political rethinking of the role of religions institutions ask for system adaptations and that the denominational approach is subject to discussion. Van Eijk criticizes this thesis and presents arguments and reasons why the current model is a good one. According to Van Eijk prison chaplaincy cannot and should not be organized only from the right of the detainee, for also aspects like the task of the government and denominational organizations and the detention context have to be considered.


Dr. mr. Ryan van Eijk
Dr. mr. R. van Eijk is secretaris van het oecumenische Centrum voor Justitiepastoraat (een initiatief van Tilburg University en de Protestantse Theologische Universiteit, Amsterdam) te Tilburg en justitiepastor in PI Vught. Hij schrijft deze bijdrage op persoonlijke titel.
Discussie

Law is again

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden legal anthropology, legal pluralism, anthropology of law
Auteurs Barbara Oomen
Auteursinformatie

Barbara Oomen
Barbara Oomen holds a chair in the Sociology of Human Rights at Utrecht University and is the Dean of University College Roosevelt, one of the first Liberal Arts and Sciences Colleges in the Netherlands. She previously held an endowed chair in Legal Pluralism at the University of Amsterdam. Her most recent book is Rights for Others: the slow home-coming of human rights in the Netherlands (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).
Diversen

Cracks in the mirror

Does European law and society research still reflect European society?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Europe, socio-legal studies, legal culture, methodology
Auteurs Marc Hertogh
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    What’s the significance of sociology of law in Europe? Before we can answer this question, it’s even more important to consider the reverse question: what’s the significance of Europe in sociology of law? European sociology of law has been very productive, but it has also become increasingly out of touch. Unlike the early years of the discipline, contemporary European law and society research is no longer a mirror of European society. There are three main reasons for this development. First, there’s a strong pull of the policy audience. Second, some of the most important studies in European sociology of law borrow their theories and concepts from previous work in the United States. And finally, most researchers are concerned with studying law and society in their own country, but only very few studies look at law and society from a transnational perspective. To fix these cracks in the mirror, we need more ‘Europe’ in European sociology of law. Similar to the work of the founding fathers of the discipline, sociology of law should once again become a reflection of society. Not for reasons of nostalgia, but because this will secure the future of European law and society research.


Marc Hertogh
Marc Hertogh is Professor of Socio-Legal Studies at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. He is Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Law in Context (Cambridge University Press) and he is a member the Advisory Board of Recht der Werkelijkheid. His research focuses on public opinion about law, with a special interest in legal consciousness, legal pluralism, and administrative justice. His publications include: Recht van onderop [Law from below] (with Heleen Weyers) (Ars Aequi, 2011), Living Law: Reconsidering Eugen Ehrlich (Hart Publishing, 2008), Judicial Review and Bureaucratic Impact (with Simon Halliday) (CUP, 2004).
Artikel

Estoppel vanuit civil law perspectief

Proefschrift van mr. J.H. Ermers

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden venire contra factum proprium, estoppel, rechtsvergelijking, rechtsverwerking, dwaling
Auteurs Prof. dr. V. Mak
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In welke omstandigheden kan een beroep worden gedaan op de eerder door de wederpartij opgewekte schijn? Ermers onderzocht hoe het Engelse leerstuk van ‘estoppel’ als inspiratiebron kan dienen voor het Nederlandse recht.


Prof. dr. V. Mak
Prof. dr. V. Mak is hoogleraar Nederlands en Europees verbintenissenrecht aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
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.