293 resultados para Multiparty litigation
Resumo:
We discuss the problem of determining whether the state of several quantum mechanical subsystems is entangled. As in previous work on two subsystems we introduce a procedure for checking separability that is based on finding state extensions with appropriate properties and may be implemented as a semidefinite program. The main result of this work is to show that there is a series of tests of this kind such that if a multiparty state is entangled this will eventually be detected by one of the tests. The procedure also provides a means of constructing entanglement witnesses that could in principle be measured in order to demonstrate that the state is entangled.
Resumo:
Aim: To present an evidence-based framework to improve the quality of occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity for litigation, compensation and insurance purposes. Methods: Grounded theory methodology was used to collect and analyse data from a sample of 31 participants, comprising 19 occupational therapists, 6 medical specialists and 6 lawyers. A focused semistructured interview was completed with each participant. In addition, 20 participants verified the key findings. Results: The framework is contextualised within a medicolegal system requiring increasing expertise. The framework consists of (i) broad professional development strategies and principles, and (ii) specific strategies and principles for improving opinions through reporting and assessment practices. Conclusions: The synthesis of the participants' recommendations provides systematic guidelines for improving occupational therapy expert opinion on work capacity.
Resumo:
In the area of international environmental law this thesis proposes the formulation of one-step planning and permitting regulation for the integrated utilisation of new surface mines as depositories for municipal solid waste. Additionally, the utilisation of abandoned and currently operated surface mines is proposed as solid waste landfills as an integral step in their reclamation. Existing laws, litigation and issues in the United Kingdom, the U.S. and Canada are discussed because of their common legal system, language and heritage. The critical shortage of approved space for disposal of solid waste has caused an urgent and growing problem for both the waste disposal industry and society. Surface mining can serve three important environmental and societal functions inuring to the health and welfare of the public: (1) providing basic minerals for goods and construction; (20 sequentially, to provide critically needed, safe burial sites for society's wastes, and (3) to conserve land by dual purpose use and to restore derelict land to beneficial surface use. Currently, the first two functions are treated environmentally, and in regulation, as two different siting problems, yet they both are earth-disturbing and excavating industries requiring surface restoration. The processes are largely duplicative and should be combined for better efficiency, less earth disturbance, conservation of land, and for fuller and better reclamation of completed surface mines returning the surfaces to greater utility than present mined land reclamation procedures. While both industries are viewed by a developed society and its communities as "bad neighbours", they remain essential and critical for mankind's existence and welfare. The study offers successful examples of the integrated process in each country. The study argues that most non-fuel surface mine openings, if not already safe, can economically, through present containment technology, be made environmentally safe for use as solid waste landfills. Simultaneously, the procedure safeguards and monitors protection of ground and surface waters from landfill contamination.
Resumo:
Increasingly users are seen as the weak link in the chain, when it comes to the security of corporate information. Should the users of computer systems act in any inappropriate or insecure manner, then they may put their employers in danger of financial losses, information degradation or litigation, and themselves in danger of dismissal or prosecution. This is a particularly important concern for knowledge-intensive organisations, such as universities, as the effective conduct of their core teaching and research activities is becoming ever more reliant on the availability, integrity and accuracy of computer-based information resources. One increasingly important mechanism for reducing the occurrence of inappropriate behaviours, and in so doing, protecting corporate information, is through the formulation and application of a formal ‘acceptable use policy (AUP). Whilst the AUP has attracted some academic interest, it has tended to be prescriptive and overly focussed on the role of the Internet, and there is relatively little empirical material that explicitly addresses the purpose, positioning or content of real acceptable use policies. The broad aim of the study, reported in this paper, is to fill this gap in the literature by critically examining the structure and composition of a sample of authentic policies – taken from the higher education sector – rather than simply making general prescriptions about what they ought to contain. There are two important conclusions to be drawn from this study: (1) the primary role of the AUP appears to be as a mechanism for dealing with unacceptable behaviour, rather than proactively promoting desirable and effective security behaviours, and (2) the wide variation found in the coverage and positioning of the reviewed policies is unlikely to be fostering a coherent approach to security management, across the higher education sector.
Resumo:
This article begins by setting out the human rights provisions that apply to social media expression. It then provides insight into the part social media plays within our society by analysing the social media landscape and how it facilitates a ‘purer’ form of expression. The social media paradox is explored through the lens of current societal issues and concerns regarding the use of social media and how these have manifested into litigation. It concludes by analysing the tension that the application of an array of criminal legislation and jurisprudence has created with freedom of expression, and whether this can successfully mitigated by the Director of Public Prosecution’s Interim Guidelines.
Resumo:
Introduction - The Dutch implementation of the black border provision in the 2001 European Union Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) is studied to examine the implications of tobacco industry involvement in the implementation phase of the policy process. Methods - A qualitative analysis was conducted of Dutch government documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, triangulated with in-depth interviews with key informants and secondary data sources (publicly available government documents, scientific literature, and news articles). Results - Tobacco manufacturers’ associations were given the opportunity to set implementation specifications via a fast-track deal with the government. The offer of early implementation of the labelling section of the TPD was used as political leverage by the industry, and underpinned by threats of litigation and arguments highlighting the risks of additional public costs and the benefits to the government of expediency and speed. Ultimately, the government agreed to the industry's interpretation, against the advice of the European Commission. Conclusions - The findings highlight the policy risks associated with corporate actors’ ability to use interactions over technical product specifications to influence the implementation of health policy and illustrate the difficulties in limiting industry interference in accordance with Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The implementation phase is particularly vulnerable to industry influence, where negotiation with industry actors may be unavoidable and the practical implications of relatively technical considerations are not always apparent to policymakers. During the implementation of the new TPD 2014/40/EU, government officials are advised to take a proactive role in stipulating technical specifications.
Resumo:
The tobacco industry's future depends on increasing tobacco use in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), which face a growing burden of tobacco-related disease, yet have potential to prevent full-scale escalation of this epidemic. To drive up sales the industry markets its products heavily, deliberately targeting non-smokers and keeps prices low until smoking and local economies are sufficiently established to drive prices and profits up. The industry systematically flaunts existing tobacco control legislation and works aggressively to prevent future policies using its resource advantage to present highly misleading economic arguments, rebrand political activities as corporate social responsibility, and establish and use third parties to make its arguments more palatable. Increasingly it is using domestic litigation and international arbitration to bully LMICs from implementing effective policies and hijacking the problem of tobacco smuggling for policy gain, attempting to put itself in control of an illegal trade in which there is overwhelming historical evidence of its complicity. Progress will not be realised until tobacco industry interference is actively addressed as outlined in Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Exemplar LMICs show this action can be achieved and indicate that exposing tobacco industry misconduct is an essential first step.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Standardised packaging (SP) of tobacco products is an innovative tobacco control measure opposed by transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) whose responses to the UK government's public consultation on SP argued that evidence was inadequate to support implementing the measure. The government's initial decision, announced 11 months after the consultation closed, was to wait for 'more evidence', but four months later a second 'independent review' was launched. In view of the centrality of evidence to debates over SP and TTCs' history of denying harms and manufacturing uncertainty about scientific evidence, we analysed their submissions to examine how they used evidence to oppose SP. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We purposively selected and analysed two TTC submissions using a verification-oriented cross-documentary method to ascertain how published studies were used and interpretive analysis with a constructivist grounded theory approach to examine the conceptual significance of TTC critiques. The companies' overall argument was that the SP evidence base was seriously flawed and did not warrant the introduction of SP. However, this argument was underpinned by three complementary techniques that misrepresented the evidence base. First, published studies were repeatedly misquoted, distorting the main messages. Second, 'mimicked scientific critique' was used to undermine evidence; this form of critique insisted on methodological perfection, rejected methodological pluralism, adopted a litigation (not scientific) model, and was not rigorous. Third, TTCs engaged in 'evidential landscaping', promoting a parallel evidence base to deflect attention from SP and excluding company-held evidence relevant to SP. The study's sample was limited to sub-sections of two out of four submissions, but leaked industry documents suggest at least one other company used a similar approach. CONCLUSIONS: The TTCs' claim that SP will not lead to public health benefits is largely without foundation. The tools of Better Regulation, particularly stakeholder consultation, provide an opportunity for highly resourced corporations to slow, weaken, or prevent public health policies.
Resumo:
In this paper, I concentrate on court cases with litigants in person (lay people who act on their own behalf in legal proceedings without a counsel or solicitor) and discuss the challenges of building a corpus of courtroom discourse where it is crucial to distinguish between speakers due to their distinct institutional roles. The corpus incorporates seven sub-corpora of verbatim transcripts from different court cases with litigants in person and comprises over eleven-million tokens. The focus of this paper is on the interplay between the legal and lay discourse types and how judges project their institutional roles through well-initiated turns directed at litigants in person and counsels. As a versatile discourse marker, well provides a good opportunity to explore how judges have to adapt their roles to ensure lay litigants in person receive the necessary support and that their lack of competence does not impede on the fairness of the proceedings. Given the breadth and importance of the topic of litigation in person, I discuss how the tools and approaches of corpus linguistics can be helpful in this multi-disciplinary area where multiple functions and uses of individual linguistic features need to be explored in depth.
Resumo:
This article demonstrates that raising fixed costs can serve as a credible mechanism for a well placed firm to exclude its rivals. We identify a number of credible avenues, such as increased regulation, vexatious litigation and increased prices for essential inputs, through which such a firm can raise fixed costs. We show that for a wide range of oligopoly models this may be a profitable strategy, even if the firm’s own fixed costs are affected as much (or even more) than its rivals and even if it is less efficient. The resulting reduction in the number of firms in the market is detrimental to consumer welfare and hence worthy of scrutiny by competition and regulatory authorities.
Resumo:
The purpose of the study was to assess the legal knowledge of preservice teachers completing their educational training at accredited South Florida universities. The population consisted of 372 preservice kindergarten through twelfth grade teachers completing their educational training in any area of public school education.^ The researcher selected areas of school law to assess based on nationwide studies of litigation involving teachers and school boards, the areas most pertinent to the teachers' daily activities and responsibilities. A forty-item instrument was developed and administered to preservice teachers at six South Florida public and private universities. The areas of school law surveyed were tort liability, teachers' rights as instructors and employees, and students' rights. The research questions asked if preservice teachers possess a fundamental knowledge of school law in any of the identified areas and if a significant difference of legal knowledge existed when comparing preservice teachers by university and comparing preservice elementary and preservice secondary teachers. The criteria for a fundamental knowledge of school law was established as scoring 80% or above on the total survey or any area of school law.^ Conclusions. (1) On the overall survey, the preservice teachers did not exhibit a fundamental knowledge of school law. The mean score was 64.2%, with 11.6% of the respondents scoring at or above the 80% level. (2) The preservice teachers did not possess a fundamental knowledge of school law in any of the three areas of school law, though the survey revealed a difference in the preservice teachers' knowledge in the specific areas. The scores were tort liability, 71.9%; teachers' rights, 65%; and students' rights, 52.3%. (3) A significant difference did not exist between elementary and secondary preservice teachers' knowledge of school law. (4) A significant difference did not exist among the preservice teachers' knowledge of school law when compared by university.^ The study suggested a need for increased instruction in these areas of school law to preservice teachers prior to the beginning of their teaching careers. ^
Resumo:
Title 1 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all employers, public and private, with more than fifteen employees to provide reasonable accommodation to qualified individuals with disabilities if the accommodation would, within limits, allow the individual to perform the essential functions of the job. Seven years after Congress enacted the law and five years after the initial provisions became effective, little information is available about the experience of organizations faced with requests for workplace accommodation.^ The question addressed in this study is: How are organizations responding to the ADA mandate to fit individuals with psychiatric disabilities in the workplace? The data sources are three organizations that allowed access to this sensitive information, and a fourth that had two disability discrimination charges filed against it.^ A brute-force case method approach applied to the four organizations yields the following information: Attorneys are hesitant to allow inquiry into company policy owing to fear of litigation; workers are not disclosing and requesting accommodation; tacit accommodation of long-standing employees appears to be a regular practice; knowledge of the intent of the ADA makes a difference in terms of equality of treatment; and insensitivity to employee privacy results in an adversarial situation.^ Implications are relevant to the need to improve lines of communication between human resource, EEO, supervisory, and legal staff; consequences of failure to address accommodations on an explicit level; need for better understanding of the availability and use of outside resources for achieving accommodation; and improvement of self-advocacy and disclosure by the employees with disabilities. ^
Resumo:
This study examined the acceptability and utility of the content of an extensive automobile tort voir dire questionnaire in Florida Circuit Civil Court. The ultimate purpose was to find questionnaire items from established measures that have demonstrated utility in uncovering biases that were at the same time not objectionable to the courts. The survey instrument included a venireperson questionnaire that used case-specific attitudinal and personality measures as well as typical information asked about personal history. The venireperson questionnaire incorporated measures that have proven reliable in other personal injury studies (Hans, & Lofquist, 1994). In order to examine judges' ratings, the questionnaire items were grouped into eight categories. Claims Consciousness scale measures general attitudes towards making claims based on one's legal rights. Belief in a Just World measures how sympathetic the juror would be to people who have suffered injuries. Political Efficacy is another general attitude scale that identifies attitudes towards the government. Litigation Crisis scales elicits attitudes about civil litigation. Case Specific Beliefs about Automobile Accidents and Litigation were taken from questionnaires developed and used in auto torts and other personal injury cases. Juror's personal history was divided into Demographics and Trial Relevant Attitudes. Ninety-seven circuit civil judges critiqued the questionnaire for acceptability, relevance to the type of case presented, and usefulness to attorneys for determining peremptories. ^ The majority of judges' responses confirmed that the central dimension in judicial thinking is juror qualification rather than juror partiality. Only three of the eight voir dire categories were considered relevant by more than 50 percent of the judges: Trial Relevant Experiences, Juror Demographics, and Tort Reform. Additionally, several acceptable items from generally disapproved categories were identified among the responses. These were general and case specific attitudinal items that are related to tort reform. We discuss the utility of voir dire items for discerning juror partiality. ^
Resumo:
Death qualification is a part of voir dire that is unique to capital trials. Unlike all other litigation, capital jurors must affirm their willingness to impose both legal standards (either life in prison or the death penalty). Jurors who assert they are able to do so are deemed “death-qualified” and are eligible for capital jury service: jurors who assert that they are unable to do so are deemed “excludable” or “scrupled” and are barred from hearing a death penalty case. During the penalty phase in capital trials, death-qualified jurors weigh the aggravators (i.e., arguments for death) against the mitigators (i.e., arguments for life) in order to determine the sentence. If the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances, then the jury is to recommend death; if the mitigating circumstances outweigh the aggravating circumstances, then the jury is to recommend life. The jury is free to weigh each aggravating and mitigating circumstance in any matter they see fit. Previous research has found that death qualification impacts jurors' receptiveness to aggravating and mitigating circumstances (e.g., Luginbuhl & Middendorf, 1988). However, these studies utilized the now-defunct Witherspoon rule and did not include a case scenario for participants to reference. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether death qualification affects jurors' endorsements of aggravating and mitigating circumstances when Witt, rather than Witherspoon, is the legal standard for death qualification. Four hundred and fifty venirepersons from the 11 th Judicial Circuit in Miami, Florida completed a booklet of stimulus materials that contained the following: two death qualification questions; a case scenario that included a summary of the guilt and penalty phases of a capital case; a 26-item measure that required participants to endorse aggravators, nonstatutory mitigators, and statutory mitigators on a 6-point Likert scale; and standard demographic questions. Results indicated that death-qualified venirepersons, when compared to excludables, were more likely to endorse aggravating circumstances. Excludable participants, when compared to death-qualified venirepersons, were more likely to endorse nonstatutory mitigators. There was no significant difference between death-qualified and excludable venirepersons with respect to their endorsement of 6 out of 7 statutory mitigators. It would appear that the Furman v. Georgia (1972) decision to declare the death penalty unconstitutional is frustrated by the Lockhart v. McCree (1986) affirmation of death qualification. ^