Escaping the debt trap: peripheral countries in prolonged debt crises and how to exit

This thesis is an interdisciplinary piece of academic research, situated within Critical Theory but engaging with other disciplines, mainly Political Economy and Politics, to tackle the topic at hand; sovereign debt crises. The thesis deals with the Problem of Debt and, more specifically, the Problem of Prolonged Sovereign Debt Crises, which is described in this thesis as the phenomenon of the “Debt Trap”. The specific question that will occupy us in this thesis is why countries appear unable to exit these prolonged debt crises. By exiting a debt crisis, we mean here a state of affairs in which a country has managed to render its debt sustainable, regain its democratic sovereignty, achieve economic recovery and, what is more, mitigate adverse effects of the crisis, especially in what human development, social inequality and poverty rates are concerned. This question is tackled through the use of an interdisciplinary approach that combines critical theory perspectives -which are grouped in two paradigms, the Subjectivity paradigm and the genealogies of Capitalism paradigm- with financialisation literature. The purpose is to form an interdisciplinary intellectual framework that will allow us to analyse with a critical perspective the two case studies of the Greek crisis from 2009 to 2015 and the Argentinean crisis from 1983 to 2005. The aim of the thesis is to develop a theoretical framework that allows us to deconstruct the various ideological approaches to these two particular cases of Debt traps, including neoclassical and neoliberal approaches, Conservative and Keynesian approaches and uncover the political, economic and class relation that underpin the prolonged crises that the two countries have experienced.

Judicial Specialisation in Intellectual Property: the Unified Patent Court as a Model of Specialised Court

The aim of this thesis is to discuss and develop the Unified Patent Court project to account for the role it could play in implementing judicial specialisation in the Intellectual Property field. To provide an original contribution to the existing literature on the topic, this work addresses the issue of how the Unified Patent Court could relate to the other forms of judicial specialisation already operating in the European Union context. This study presents a systematic assessment of the not-yet-operational Unified Patent Court within the EU judicial system, which has recently shown a trend towards being developed outside the institutional framework of the European Union Court of Justice. The objective is to understand to what extent the planned implementation of the Unified Patent Court could succeed in responding to the need for specialisation and in being compliant with the EU legal and constitutional framework. Using the Unified Patent Court as a case study, it is argued that specialised courts in the field of Intellectual Property have a significant role to play in the European judicial system and offer an adequate response to the growing complexity of business operations and relations. The significance of this study is to analyse whether the UPC can still be considered as an appropriate solution to unify the European patent litigation system. The research considers the significant deficiencies, which risks having a negative effect on the European Union institutional procedures. In this perspective, this work aims to make a contribution in identifying the potential negative consequences of this reform. It also focuses on considering different alternatives for a European patent system, which could effectively promote innovation in Europe.