Suchergebnisse

Congressional control of state taxation : evidence and lessons for federalism theory / Brian Gale -- Harmonisation of private law in Europe / Michael Faure -- Lessons in fiscal federalism from American Indian nations / Terry L. Anderson and Dominic P. Parker -- Do profits promote pollution? The myth of the environmental race to the bottom / Robert K. Fleck and F. Andrew Hanssen -- Uncontrolled experiments from the laboratories of democracy : traditional cash welfare, federalism, and welfare reform / Jonah B. Gelbach -- Medicaid / Marianne P. Bitler and Madeline Zavodny -- Entrepreneurial creative destruction and legal federalism / John A. Dove and Russell S. Sobel -- Federalism and the rise of state consumer protection law in the United States / Joshua D. Wright

Historical development of planning law -- Basis and objects of modern planning law -- Central and local administration -- Development plans before the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 -- Development plans after the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 -- Definition of development -- Planning permission : permitted development -- Planning permission and nationally significant infrastructure development consent -- Environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment -- Planning permission : further considerations -- Revocation or modification of existing rights -- The enforcement of planning control -- Planning agreements and obligations -- Purchase notices and blight notices -- Special forms of control -- Buildings of special interest and conservation areas -- Special cases -- Planning and environmental controls -- Planning appeals -- Review by the courts and the ombudsman -- Planning compensation

Der Beitrag präsentiert einen Überblick der nationalsozialistischen Strafrechtsgesetzgebung, mit der zum einen durch 'Sondergerichte' wie durch die Einführung von Gesetzen für bestimmte Tätertypen ('Sondergesetze') der rechtsstaatliche Grundsatz der Gleichheit außer Kraft gesetzt wurde. Die NS-Justiz war dabei daraufhin angelegt, 'Informationen' von 'Volksgenossen' zu sammeln, um so überhaupt Tatbestände wie 'Rassenschande' verfolgen zu können. Das 'Blutschutzgesetz' verbot den 'außerehelichen Verkehr' zwischen Juden und Ariern; das Reichsgericht zum 'Schutz der deutschen Ehre' ahndete jedoch schon Vorbereitungshandlungen oder die bloße Aufforderung zum Verkehr. Dadurch wurden Schnüffeleien und Denunziationen aus Sexualneid, Rache oder Geschäftskonkurrenz nicht nur provoziert, sondern als Beitrag zur 'Sicherung der Deutschen Nation für alle Zukunft' glorifiziert. Der Beitrag geht in diesem Zusammenhang auf den im Zeichen des Kalten Krieges in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland eingeführten Tatbestand der 'Verfolgung durch Verdächtigung' ein, um so 'Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit in der SBZ' ahnden zu können. (ICA)

"The book addresses questions about the roles of law and politics and the challenge of legitimacy in constitutional adjudication in the Supreme Court. With all sophisticated observers recognizing that the Justices' political outlooks influence their decision making, many political scientists, some of the public, and a few prominent judges have become Cynical Realists. In their view Justices vote based on their policy preferences, and legal reasoning is mere window-dressing. This book rejects Cynical Realism, but without denying many Realist insights. It explains the limits of language and history in resolving contentious constitutional issues. To rescue the notion that the Constitution is law that binds the Justices, the book provides an original account of what law is and means in the Supreme Court. It also offers a theory of legitimacy in Supreme Court adjudication. Given the nature of law in the Supreme Court, we need to accept and learn to respect reasonable disagreement about many constitutional issues. If so, the legitimacy question becomes: how would the Justices need to decide cases so that even those who disagree with the outcomes ought to respect the Justices' processes of decision? The book gives a fresh and counterintuitive answer to that vital question. Adapting a methodology made famous by John Rawls, it argues that the Justices should strive to achieve a "reflective equilibrium" between their interpretive principles, framed to identify the Constitution's enduring meaning, and their judgments about appropriate outcomes in particular cases, evaluated as prescriptions for the nation to live by in the future. The book blends the perspectives of law, philosophy, and political science to answer theoretical and practical questions of pressing national importance"--

The paper will attempt to show that there are many factors associated with a small domestic market that have a bearing on competition law and policy, and therefore competition regime of a small state should take these factors into account. Special reference will be made to Malta, where competition legislation is modelled on EU competition law. The thrust of the arguments put forward in this paper is not that competition rules should be discarded in small states or that abuse should be tolerated. The basic contention is that exceptions, normally based on considerations such as improved efficiency, distribution, and overall consumer benefit, are more likely to be relevant in small states in certain circumstances. ; peer-reviewed

Die Stellungnahme zeichnet den bisherigen Stand der Verankerung des Rechts auf eine gesunde Umwelt nach und stellt die Argumentationen von Befürworter_innen und Skeptiker_innen einer internationalen Anerkennung des Menschenrechts auf eine gesunde Umwelt dar.

Summary: In the late twentieth century, most European states have adopted legislation on unfair contract terms. The Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts has effectively made the European Court of Justice (ECJ) the final arbiter in interpreting much of this legislation. The present paper explores the impact which the ECJ case law and foreign legal writing has had in an individual Member State, that is, the Netherlands. Seven issues are highlighted. (i) First, especially in the United States, information requirements as to contract terms have been investigated and found wanting. Although it must be conceded that not every consumer will read the small print even when enticed by the legislature to do so, this paper submits that such requirements do have some value. (ii) Contra proferentem interpretation is one of three age-old weapons against unfair contract terms; but, unlike the common law, Dutch law has not made much use of it. (iii) Dutch law has used the overt control over the introduction into the contract and the content of standard contract terms, but the result is of little use to guide parties, attorneys, and judges. Dutch case law, unlike that in Germany, is so much attuned to the circumstances of the case that it hardly establishes useful precedents. (iv) One of the first cases on unfair contract terms decided by the ECJ, the Océano case, caused a major discussion in the Netherlands. Should the Dutch legislature step in and change the sanction of avoidance or nullification into that of considering an unfair term not binding, or should the consequences of ex officio avoidance or nullification be left to the existing statutory provisions? The Hoge Raad eventually came to terms with Océano and the following ECJ case law in Heesakkers v. Voet. (v) An issue with regard to which Dutch courts have not yet had the opportunity to tie in with the case law of the ECJ is the problem of geltungserhaltende Reduktion, rejected in the Banesto case, which is in line with German case law. Until Banesto, Dutch case law had in fact accepted the device of geltungserhaltende Reduktion. This paper strongly supports the approach applied by the ECJ and German case law. (vi) Dutch law does not extend the control of unfair contract terms to the main subject matter. This is in line with the EC Directive and the case law of the ECJ (Kásler), and it is an expression of the rejection of the iustum pretium doctrine. The Nordic experience with handling unfair contract terms, without the exception for the main subject matter, demonstrates that the exception is not necessary. (vii) Finally, with regard to enforcement, the Dutch experience shows some surprising discrepancies with that in Germany. The two models may be described as the Dutch poldermodel and the German 'battle' model. The final paragraph sets out the conclusion of the foregoing analysis. In dealing with unfair contract terms, a collective approach should be favoured. Indeed, the Unfair Contract Terms Directive itself directs Member States to do so. Unfortunately, this is hidden for practitioners, because their understanding of the Directive will usually be limited to the part which has been transposed into national legislation, and the national legislation usually does not include the relevant provisions of the Directive. Also, it may be argued that a collective breach needs a collective remedy. This has been illustrated by two issues concerning unfair contract terms. The first one is the validity or invalidity of exemption clauses in standard terms. A second example is the question of the (in)validity of an arbitration clause in standard building terms.

The term "misuse of the rights of a taxpayer" is analyzed in this article. Foreign law doctrines on misuse of the rights of a taxpayer are examined, foreign legislation and court practice.