38 resultados para Domestic relations (Roman law).
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
Ignacy Koschembahr-Łyskowski: a professor at the University of Fribourg (1895-1900) Ignacy Koschembahr-Łyskowski (1864-1945) was a Polish legal scholar researching into Roman and Private laws; one of the drafters of Polish unified Private Law in the Interwar era. After having obtained his PhD in Berlin in 1888 and postdoctoral degree in Breslau in 1894, he moved to Fribourg (Switzerland), where he stayed 5 years (1895-1900) as a professor for Roman law. Koschembahr-Łyskowski wrote there his fundamental works on the methodology of Roman law (1898) and its usefulness for modernity, as well as about the codification of Swiss Private Law (1899), demonstrating the usefulness of the Roman law experience for modern legislation. An overview of his works shows a surprising topicality of his ideas. The survey concentrates on his teaching in Fribourg as well as his writings, and is based on many newly discovered documents from the local archives, that have never been published before.
Resumo:
Trade, investment and migration are strongly intertwined, being three key factors in international production. Yet, law and regulation of the three has remained highly fragmented. Trade is regulated by the WTO on the multilateral level, and through preferential trade agreements on the regional and bilateral levels – it is fragmented and complex in its own right. Investment, on the other hand, is mainly regulated through bilateral investment treaties with no strong links to the regulation of trade or migration. And, finally, migration is regulated by a web of different international, regional and bilateral agreements which focus on a variety of different aspects of migration ranging from humanitarian to economic. The problems of institutional fragmentation in international law are well known. There is no organizational forum for coherent strategy-making on the multilateral level covering all three areas. Normative regulations may thus contradict each other. Trade regulation may bring about liberalization of access for service providers, but eventually faces problems in recruiting the best people from abroad. Investors may withdraw investment without being held liable for disruptions to labour and to the livelihood and infrastructure of towns and communities affected by disinvestment. Finally, migration policies do not seem to have a significant impact as long as trade policies and investment policies are not working in a way that is conducive to reducing migration pressure, as trade and investment are simply more powerful on the regulatory level than migration. This chapter addresses the question as to how fragmentation of the three fields could be reme-died and greater coherence between these three areas of factor allocation in international economic relations and law could be achieved. It shows that migration regulation on the international level is lagging behind that on trade and investment. Stronger coordination and consideration of migration in trade and investment policy, and stronger international cooperation in migration, will provide the foundations for a coherent international architecture in the field.
Resumo:
The mediaeval interpreters of Roman law have worked out the dolus re ipsa-concept to explain the mysterious laesio enormis (C. 4.44.2 [a. 285]). The inequality in exchange has been supposed then to be a result of malicious undertaking, for which paradoxically, no one was personally liable (Ulp. 45 ad Sab. D. 45.1.36). In course of time, the incorporation of laesio enormis into the scheme of dolus turned into a presumption of a malicious act on the part of the enriched party, even though, the laesio enormis is free from subjective criteria. It is astonishing how little the dolus re ipsa is discussed, although the modern paradigm for correcting inequality in exchange is based on same assumptions. This ‘Wiederkehr der Rechtsfigur’ certainly deserves more attention.
