889 resultados para Arbitration (Administrative law)
Resumo:
"List of authorities". v. 2, p. 303-307.
Resumo:
Bibliography: p. 109-110.
Resumo:
"Includes index"
Resumo:
In recent years, the US Supreme Court has rather controversially extended the ambit of the Federal Arbitration Act to extend arbitration’s reach into, inter alia¸ consumer matters, with the consequence that consumers are often (and unbeknownst to them) denied remedies which would otherwise be available. Such denied remedies include recourse to class action proceedings, effective denial of punitive damages, access to discovery and the ability to resolve the matter in a convenient forum.
The court’s extension of arbitration’s ambit is controversial. Attempts to overturn this extension have been made in Congress, but to no avail. In contrast to American law, European consumer law looks at pre-dispute agreements to arbitrate directed at consumers with extreme suspicion, and does so on the grounds of fairness. In contrast, some argue that pre-dispute agreements in consumer (and employment) matters are consumer welfare enhancing: they decrease the costs of doing business, which is then passed on to the consumer. This Article examines these latter claims from both an economic and normative perspective.
The economic analysis of these arguments shows that their assumptions do not hold. Rather than being productive of consumer surplus, the use of arbitration is likely to have the opposite effect. The industries from which the recent Supreme Court cases originated not only do not exhibit the industrial structure assumed by the proponents of expanded arbitration, but are also industries which exhibit features that facilitate consumer welfare reducing collusion.
The normative analysis addresses the fairness concerns. It is explicitly based upon John Rawls’ notion of “justice as fairness,” which can provide a lens to evaluate social institutions. This Rawlsian analysis considers the use of extended arbitration in consumer matters in the light of the earlier economic results. It suggests that the asymmetries present in the contractual allocation of rights serve as prima facie evidence that such arbitration–induced exclusions are prima facie unjust/unfair. However, as asymmetry is only a prima facie test, a generalized criticism of the arbitration exclusions (of the sort found in Congress and underlying the European regime) is overbroad.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mandatory data breach notification laws are a novel statutory solution in relation to organizational protections of personal information. They require organizations which have suffered a breach of security involving personal information to notif'y those persons whose information may have been affected. These laws originated in the state based legislatures of the United States during the last decade and have subsequently garnered worldwide legislative interest. Despite their perceived utility, mandatory data breach notification laws have several conceptual and practical concems that limit the scope of their applicability, particularly in relation to existing information privacy law regimes. We outline these concerns, and in doing so, we contend that while mandatory data breach notification laws have many useful facets, their utility as an 'add-on' to enhance the failings of current information privacy law frameworks should not necessarily be taken for granted.
Resumo:
This chapter questions whether Japanese administrative law reform agenda aimed at promoting greater transparency in decision-making will necessarily lead to better policy outcomes for Japanese women. The chapter evaluates recent legislative reforms and policymaking initiatives in the area of sexual harassment and argues that these developments do not improve the situation for Japanese women. The reason is that the new rules effectively charge corporations with the responsibility to self-regulate, thereby transforming sexual harassment from a public issue of human rights to a domestic issue of corporate governance.
Resumo:
The Lisbon Agenda places Europe in a uniquely difficult position globally, most particularly as an example of a social and regulatory experiment which many consider to be doomed to failure. The drive towards economic competitiveness has led to a focus on regulation and its effect on entrepreneurship, productivity and business growth but assessing this relationship is complex for a number of reasons. First, not all regulatory effects can be predicted precisely in relation to behavioural outcomes. Path-dependency scholars have also demonstrated that the regulation will have varying effects depending on context. Second, theoretically it is clear that many non-regulatory factors may contribute to economic and competitive success. Third, there is evidence of internal conflict within the Commission as to the relative importance of the Lisbon goals. Finally, the experience of distinct Member States presents challenges both for assessment and prescriptive remedies. The Commission has estimated that the cost of regulatory compliance obligations on businesses in the EU is between 4% and 6% of gross domestic product and that 15% of this figure is avoidable 'red tape' (the term used specifically to signify unnecessary compliance burdens). This article proposes to assess the likely outcomes of de-regulation as we rapidly approach 2010, the year for attainment of the Lisbon goals.
Resumo:
Drawing on my experience of a number of sports dispute resolution tribunals in the UK and Ireland (such as Sports Resolutions UK; Just Sport Ireland; the Football Association of Ireland’s Disciplinary Panel and the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Dispute Resolution Authority) I intend to use this paper to review the legal arguments typically made in sports-related arbitrations. These points of interest can be summarised as a series of three questions: the fairness question; the liability question; the penalty question.
In answer to the fairness question, the aim is to give a brief outline on best practice in establishing a "fair" sports disciplinary tribunal. The answer, I believe, is always twofold in nature: first, and to paraphrase Lord Steyn in R v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26 at [28] "in law, context is everything" – translated into the present matter, this means that in sports disciplinary cases, the more serious the charges against the individual (in terms of reputational damage, economic impact and/or length of sanction); the more tightly wrapped the procedural safeguards surrounding any subsequent disciplinary hearing must be. A fair disciplinary system will be discussed in the context of the principles laid down in Article 8 of the World Anti-Doping Code which, in effect, acts as sport’s Article 6 of the ECHR on a right to a fair trial.
Following on from the above, in the 60 or so sports arbitrations that I have heard, there are two further points of interest. First, the claim before the arbitral panel will often be framed in an argument that, for various reasons of substantive and procedural irregularity, the sanction imposed on the appellant should be quashed ("the liability"). Second, and in alternative, that the sanction imposed was wholly disproportionate ("the penalty").
The liability issue usually breaks down into two further questions. First, what is the nature of the legal duty upon a sports body in exercising its disciplinary remit? Second, to what extent does a de novo hearing on appeal cure any apparent defects in a hearing of first instance? The first issue often results in an arbitral panel debating the contra preferentum approach to the interpretation of a contested rule i.e., the sports body’s rules in question are so ambiguous that they should be interpreted in a manner to the detriment of the rule maker and in favour of the appellant. On the second matter, it now appears to be a general principle of sports law, administrative law and even human rights law that even if a violation of the principles of natural justice takes place at the first instance stage of a disciplinary process, they may be cured on de novo appeal. Authority for this approach can be found at the Court of Arbitration for Sport and in particular in CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski v UEFA at para 87.
The question on proportionality asks what, aside from precedent found within the decisions of the sports body in question, are the general legal principles against which a sanction by a sports disciplinary body can be benchmarked in order to ascertain whether it is disproportionate in length or even irrational in nature?
On the matter of (dis)proportionality of sanction, the debate is usually guided by the authority in Bradley v the Jockey Club [2004] EWHC 2164 (QB) and affirmed at [2005] EWCA Civ 1056. The Bradley principles on proportionality of sports-specific sanctions, recently cited with approval at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will be examined in this presentation.
Finally, an interesting application of many of the above principles (and others such as the appropriate standard of proof in sports disciplinary procedures) can be made to recent match-fixing or corruption related hearings held by the British Horse Racing Authority, the integrity units of snooker and tennis, and at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Resumo:
The study examines the relationship between law, technology and water conflicts from colonial days to the present in traditional (water) tank systems in the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Tanks are man-made water systems developed for irrigation and many other purposes in semi-arid areas. The thesis adopts a historical approach to study the development of law, particularly property rights, and takes an empirical approach to investigate the tank conflicts. Archival documents on irrigation development, Case laws, Focus Group Discussions, Open ended Interviews and Field visits to selected tank chains are used as source material for the discussion. Case studies of conflicts are described and analyzed at three levels - Vaigai river basin for a macro level, Kothai Anicut system in Cauvery basin for a meso level, and twenty other interconnected tanks for a micro-level. The thesis deviates from the conventional understanding that tanks as traditional systems as simple and local technologies but considers them to be complex. It argues that the use of commonly held systems such as tanks within the colonial and post colonial laws as state ownership has been the source of many conflicts. In particular, it finds most tank conflicts are a product of progressive and absolute state control over water and the systems established using colonial land revenue administrative law. The law continues to treat tanks as pieces of landed property held by state and the individuals rather than as technology systems that presupposed the regime of property rights introduced after the colonial times. The modern interventions in water including the reservoir building, and altering the hydraulics of rivers and streams aggravate tank conflicts and lead to their further detriment. The study brings the focus to ground realities, and offers new perspectives on understanding tank systems in dynamic ways.
Resumo:
This presentation was the product of an invitation to speak at a symposium for students and faculty from a variety of different non-law departments at the University of Tennessee, where in 1973 I had started what became a six-year legal campaign to divert the Tennessee Valley Authority from impounding the last flowing 33 miles of the Little Tennessee River behind TVA’s Tellico Dam.
Resumo:
El objeto de esta tesis es el análisis de la autorregulación regulada, es decir, el análisis de las normas y de los controles privados que poseen relevancia para el Derecho público. A pesar de su aparente desvinculación con el Derecho Administrativo, la autorregulación es una tendencia que se percibe cada vez con mayor nitidez; es, claramente, un fenómeno que se asocia principalmente al uso de nuevas tecnologías, pero que desborda con mucho este ámbito. La autorregulación es una noción directamente relacionada con la transformación de las formas de gobernanza impulsada desde la Unión Europea; es una nueva técnica o instrumento que las normas jurídico-públicas, a través de numerosas remisiones a la autorregulación, ponen en manos de la administración para gestionar los fines que ésta tiene encomendados. Existe, sin embargo una clara disociación entre las esperanzas puestas en la autorregulación y la falta de respuestas que ofrece el derecho positivo. Un análisis exhaustivo de la jurisprudencia y de la legislación que utilizan la voz "autorregulación" me ha llegado a concluir que este vocablo es en nuestro ordenamiento, un "término sin concepto". En esta fuentes se asimila la "autorregulación" con la capacidad de autonormación de un sujeto. Es el derecho comunitario el que la autorregulación como una alternativa o un complemento a la desreglamentación estatal y como una manifestación de un traslado de funciones y responsabilidades públicas a la sociedad. Por influencia del Derecho comunitario, el legislador pretende, a través de la autorregulación, alcanzar dos finalidades aparentemente contradictorias: (a) facilitar la función de garante que tiene atribuida el Estado, mediante una intervención más extensa i más intensa en las actividades privadas; (b) hacer efectivo los objetos propuestos con la desregulación, mediante una contención del ejercicio de la potestad reglamentaria y una disminución de los controles, preventivos o represivos, realizados directamente por la Administración. Para salvar esta contradicción, es necesario que el legislador establezca una regulación adecuada de la autorregulación. Dicha regulación es, hoy por hoy, manifiestamente insuficiente. Deberían fijarse con carácter general -y no sólo puntualmente y por sectores- las medidas adecuadas para el fomento de la autorregulación; los efectos públicos que ésta posee en cada caso y, significativamente, las garantías y controles necesarios para contrarrestar tales efectos. Esto es, los principios que rigen la actividad administrativa deberían ser aplicados también a la autorregulación en aquellos casos en los que sus diversas manifestaciones poseen efectos similares a los que son propios de los reglamentos, las inspecciones o las sanciones administrativas. Esta propuesta deja abierta la cuestión acerca de la incidencia recíproca de ambas técnicas; esto es , la incidencia de la regulación pública en la autorregulación de origen privado y, a la inversa, el impacto del desarrollo de la autorregulación regulada en el ejercicio de las potestades reglamentaria, autorizatoria, y sancionadora de la Administración. Esta cuestión sólo puede ser contestada hoy caso por caso, de modo que la respuesta es distinta si se analiza una norma técnica, un código ético, un manual de buenas prácticas, una certificación privada del cumplimiento de normas técnicas, el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria privada o el arbritaje. De lo que no cabe duda alguna es que ni la autorregulación es sólo una actividad de interés privado, ni la regulación pública conserva hoy sus rasgos tradicionales.
Resumo:
As chamadas Políticas de Conteúdo Local (“PCLs”) fazem parte de um grupo de políticas desenvolvimentistas adotadas em todo o mundo com o objetivo de maximizar os benefícios sociais e econômicos decorrentes de determinadas atividades econômicas. Neste trabalho, analisaram-se, principalmente, as PCLs relativas à extração e produção de petróleo e gás. O instituto é juridicamente polêmico, uma vez que, além de ser difícil de definir, é instrumentalizado por diversos atos normativos diferentes. Tal situação agrava-se com o fato de que o desenho de cada PCL pode sugerir ou impor diversas medidas de implementação diferentes, com impactos nas diferentes áreas do Direito. Considerando este cenário, aponta-se que o principal objetivo deste trabalho é a análise de transplantes ao nosso ordenamento jurídico de PCLs bem-sucedidas em ordenamentos jurídicos estrangeiros. Para isso, demonstrou-se, em um primeiro momento, que o instituto das PCLs deve ser reinterpretado à luz da Constituição vigente. Isso porque as PCLs foram criadas em uma época em que a escola desenvolvimentista principal era a keynesiana, que foi substituída atualmente pela escola do Rule of Law. Embora nosso ordenamento jurídico tenha acompanhado essa evolução (através de Emendas Constitucionais e adoção de determinadas leis), as PCLs não acompanharam e, por isso, precisam sofrer essa releitura. Nesse sentido, extraíram-se da Lei quatro elementos principais que as PCLs devem preencher para estar em consonância com o Rule of Law: (A) Benefícios aos Consumidores Finais; (B) Sustentabilidade; (C) Transetorialidade; e (D) Ampliação do Mercado de Trabalho. Em sequência, classificaram-se as diversas PCLs mapeadas, exemplificando cada uma. Ao longo da classificação, apontaram-se três critérios que facilitam a identificação das maiores dificuldades jurídicas em cada transplante: (A) Canal; (B) Natureza; e (C) Instrumento. Por fim, quatro PCLs estrangeiras bem-sucedidas foram escolhidas para uma análise mais aprofundada: a Kazakhstan Contract Agency, no Cazaquistão, a Petro Arctic Supplier Asssociation, na Noruega, o Australian Industry Participation Plan na Austrália e o Nigerian Oil & Gas Content Industry Development Act, na Nigéria. Para cada uma, é dedicada uma análise especial. As análises são seguidas pela Conclusão.