Casebook on contract law

•The introductory chapter provides valuable guidance on how to use a casebook to help develop the essential skills of reading and analysing cases • Cases are accompanied by succinct author commentary designed to highlight the key elements of each case • Thought-provoking questions are posed throughout to develop an in-depth understanding of the subject •The book is easy to use and navigate through as the case extracts are clearly distinguished from author commentary Jill Poole's bestselling Casebook on Contract Law provides students with a comprehensive selection of case law which addresses all aspects of the subject encountered on undergraduate courses. Extracts have been chosen from a wide range of historical and contemporary cases to illustrate the reasoning processes of the courts and to show how legal principles are developed. The cases can either be analysed and discussed independently or, taken as a whole, the cases form chapters that provide a sound understanding of the modern law of contract. The casebook is fully supported by an Online Resource Centre, which provides: -Exercises and guidance on reading cases -Guidance on answering questions in contract law -Self-test questions and answers

En busca de la justicia: los agentes de corte y chancillerías de la Mesta en siglo XVIII

Los agentes de corte y chancillerías surgieron de las mestas locales medievales y pasaron a formar parte de la Cabaña Real a principios del siglo xvi. Fueron el resultado de la mayor actividad procesal en los diferentes tribunales y de la creciente conflictividad en el campo. El oficio no tenía las funciones bien definidas porque se vio arrastrado por las disfunciones institucionales y la oposición de las chancillerías. Los Borbones se dieron cuenta de la importancia del cargo en la recuperación de la mesta y en el desarrollo de la trashumancia y elaboraron un detallado plan para desacreditarlo, suprimir el empleo de Granada, restarle atribuciones y sólo adjudicarles asuntos internos y sin relevancia. Paulatinamente fue sustituido en sus facultades y comisiones por el procurador general de corte.

Ensayo ganador del VII premio Enrique Ruano Casanova: La presencia del crucifijo en las aulas. Jurisprudencia nacional y europea

Cuando se aprueba la Constitución Española en 1978, España se convierte en un Estado aconfesional, reconociendo por primera vez un verdadero derecho de libertad religiosa de todos los individuos. Precisamente, el ejercicio de esta libertad en una situación de igualdad ha originado diversas polémicas desde que se instauró la democracia. Una de las controversias que más repercusión ha tenido en los últimos años viene determinada por la presencia de los crucifijos u otros símbolos en las aulas de algunos colegios públicos, cuestión que ha sido abordada por los tribunales españoles, así como por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos.

L'autorité des obiter dicta de la Cour suprême

En 1980, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu, dans l'arrêt Sellars, une décision qui a été interprétée par plusieurs juristes comme formulant un principe attribuant un effet contraignant à certains obiter dicta de la Cour. Autrefois limitée à la ratio decidendi, la portée obligatoire d'une décision de la Cour suprême s'étendrait dorénavant aux obiter dicta partagés par une majorité de juges. C'est, du moins, le principe qui a été reconnu et adopté par une majorité des cours d'appel canadiennes et par un nombre important de tribunaux inférieurs. Cette étude vise à retracer l'émergence de ce qu'on peut appeler «le principe Sellars». Ensuite, nous tentons d'isoler certains facteurs qui en expliqueraient l'apparition en droit canadien, pour, enfin, déterminer si, dorénavant, les obiter dicta de la Cour suprême doivent être traités comme des arguments d'autorité ou comme des diktats autoritaires.

Model jurysdykcji sądowej w postępowaniu sądowoadministracyjnym a konstytucyjne funkcje sądów administracyjnych

Wydział Prawa i Administracji: Katedra Prawa Konstytucyjnego

Drug Reformulation Regulatory Gaming in Pharmaceuticals: Enforcement & Innovation Implications

This article examines drug reformulation regulatory gaming as a vehicle for analyzing the way in which European courts and the Commission are currently approaching innovation issues in the pharmaceutical sector. First, the economics literature regarding pharmaceutical innovation is briefly summarized. Next, the phenomenon of regulatory gaming is introduced, followed by an analysis of the two primary theories of harm being used to address drug reformulations as a competition concern. In comparing the recent General Court decision in AstraZeneca to earlier U.S. court cases addressing similar conduct, it is asserted that these approaches differ in significant ways with regards to preservation of innovation incentives as well as on the basis of institutional and evidentiary concerns. Finally, this discussion is then placed into the broader context of the ongoing debate regarding pharmaceutical innovation that first surfaced in the Syfait cases—in particular, the desirability of sector-specific competition law analysis of pharmaceutical innovation.

The outset of mental torture. Through the lens of the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario

No doubt shall be placed when qualifying torture as one of the cruellest crime offences against human beings. It is widely known that the first torture practices go back to the Middle Ages, where torture mechanisms and devices were used as a legitimate means of punishment, extraction of confessions or executions. Brutal techniques such as ‘Judas Cradle’, ‘The Rack’ or the ‘Rat Torture’ were indeed, the ones commonly used. Moreover, some centuries onwards, torture warrants were permitted and authorised by Privy Councils in legislations such as the English one. However, examples like that were the only ones which public accountability was given to, whereas off-the-book practices remained in silence in other countries for long lasting years. Nowadays, in the 21st century, there are innumerable enforced laws and provisions that prohibit the act of torture, to be precise, physical and psychological torture. Nonetheless, not only are these legislations necessary for fighting torture, but also ad hoc courts and specialised committees continuously report the existence of this crime offence.

Tribunal Constitucional Internacional, Direitos Humanos e Tribunal Penal Internacional

Resumo: a criação de um Tribunal Constitucional Internacional irá possibilitar uma melhor defesa, manutenção e promoção dos direitos humanos fundamentais. Uma melhor protecção da democracia. Os direitos humanos fundamentais são, por excelência, um fenómeno que merece uma tutela por parte dos Tribunais. E também de uma protecção constitucional. Mutatis mutandis, é útil analisar o Tribunal Penal Internacional.§ Abstract: the creation of an International Constitutional Court will enable better protection, maintenance and promotion of fundamental human rights. Better protection of democracy. Fundamental human rights are par excellence, a phenomenon that deserves protection by the courts. And also a constitutional protection. Mutatis mutandis, it is useful to analyze the International Criminal Court.

Caracterización de la función cognitiva de niños con síndrome de down de 5 a 12 años en la ciudad de Bogotá

Los niños que padecen trisomía 21 poseen una serie de características físicas, neurológicas y neuropsicológicas específicas, las cuales han sido investigadas a profundidad en diferentes países, de lo cual se han desarrollado protocolos de evaluación para estos niños acorde a su nacionalidad (García, 2010). A pesar de que Colombia es uno de los países en los cuales el síndrome de Down se presenta con mayor frecuencia, hasta la fecha, no se encuentran estudios que enfaticen en las habilidades neuropsicológicas de esta población específica, por lo cual no se han desarrollado protocolos de evaluación adecuados para los niños con síndrome este síndrome. Esta investigación se llevó acabo con una población de 88 niños a los cuales se les aplicó el inventario de desarrollo BATTELLE, y se identificó que los niños con síndrome Down de 5 a 12 años obtienen un puntaje que se encuentra en 4 desviaciones estándar por debajo de la media típica. Lo anterior demuestra una característica específica de esta población en cuanto a patrones de desarrollo en las cuales, se evidencia dificultad más importante en las área cognición y de la comunicación expresiva. Con respecto a los intervalos de edad se identificó que a lo largo de estos el desempeño en las áreas evaluadas decrece. esto puede estar relacionado con la mayor complejidad de los hitos del desarrollo para una edad esperada. Debido a que los hitos del desarrollo esperados varían a lo largo de los periodos del ciclo vital del ser humano, estos tienden a aumentar su complejidad en etapas del desarrollo más avanzados; como estos niños poseen una serie de dificultades en las funciones ejecutivas y cognición, no lograrán alcanzar dichos hitos del desarrollo.

Sex and sentencing disparity in South Australia’s higher courts

In Australia, studies examining sex differences in sentencing are limited. Using data from South Australia’s higher courts, this article explores a study on the impact of sex on the decision to imprison and the length of imprisonment. After adjusting for past and current criminality, results showed that men were significantly more likely than women to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment and that when sentence length was decided, men received longer periods of incarceration. Furthermore, the study’s results suggest that different factors may be important in determining sentencing outcomes for women and men.

Indigeneity and the judicial decision to imprison : a study of Western Australia’s higher courts

Internationally, sentencing research has largely neglected the impact of Indigeneity on sentencing outcomes. Using data from Western Australia’s higher courts for the years 2003–05, we investigate the direct and interactive effects of Indigenous status on the judicial decision to imprison. Unlike prior research on race/ethnicity in which minority offenders are often found to be more harshly treated by sentencing courts, we find that Indigenous status has no direct effect on the decision to imprison,after adjusting for other sentencing factors (especially past and current criminality).However, there are sub-group differences: Indigenous males are more likely to receive a prison sentence compared to non-Indigenous females. We draw on the focal concerns perspective of judicial decision making in interpreting our findings.

Measuring risk and blameworthiness in the sentencing of criminal defendants : an exploratory study in Western Australia's Higher Courts

The focal concern perspective dominates quantitative explorations of judicial sentencing. A critical argument underlying this perspective is the role of judicial assessments of risk and blameworthiness. Prior research has not generally explored how these two concepts fit together. This study provides an empirical test of the focal concerns perspective by examining the latent structure among the measures traditionally used in sentencing research, and investigates the extent to which focal concerns can be applied in a non-US jurisdiction. Using factor analysis (as suggested by prior research), we find evidence of distinct factors of risk and blameworthiness, with separate and independent effects on sentencing outcomes. We also identify the need for further development of the focal concerns perspective, especially around the role of perceptual shorthand.

Problem-solving courts, therapeutic jurisprudence and the constitution : if two is company, is three a crowd?

Court costs, resource-intensive trials, booming prison populations and the obduracy of recidivism rates all present as ugly excesses of the criminal law adversarial paradigm. To combat these excesses, problem-solving courts have evolved with an edict to address the underlying issues that have caused an individual to commit a crime. When a judge seeks to help a problem-solving court participant deal with issues like addiction, mental health or poverty, they are performing a very different role to that of a judicial officer in the traditional court hierarchy. They are no longer the removed, independent arbiter — a problem-solving court judge steps into the ‘arena’ with the participant and makes active use of their judicial authority to assist in rehabilitation and positive behavioural change. Problem-solving court judges employing the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence appreciate that their interaction with participants can have therapeutic and anti-therapeutic consequences. This article will consider how the deployment of therapeutic measures (albeit with good intention) can lead to the behavioural manifestation of partiality and bias on the part of problem-solving court judges. Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution will then be analysed to highlight why the operation and functioning of problem solving courts may be deemed unconstitutional. Part IV of this article will explain how a problem-solving court judge who is not acting impartially or independently will potentially contravene the requirements of the Constitution. It will finally be suggested that judges who possess a high level of emotional intelligence will be the most successful in administering an independent and impartial problem solving court.

Pre-sentence Report, Magisterial Discourse and Agency in Youth Courts in England

This article draws on interviews with Youth Court magistrates to examine if and how discourses, strategies and technologies of risk governance have affected Youth Court magistrates in England and Wales. The aim of the article is to detail the complex relationship between magisterial agency in decision making and youth justice policies which focus on risk control and management. The article demonstrates that, contrary to what might be assumed from the youth and risk governance theoretical literature, Youth Offending Team risk assessments form only one part of the information used by magistrates to explain young people’s presence in courts. This article concludes that magisterial decision making is framed not by formal, expert assessments of risk, but by magistrates’ claims that they are ‘knowing outsiders’, who through judicious use of information presented to them and their own life experiences are able to make objective judgements about both the risk assessments authored by Youth Offending Teams and the young lawbreakers before them.