On the origin of the order Artiodactyla.

The first known members of the order Artiodactyla appeared suddenly throughout the Holarctic region at the beginning of the Eocene. They are characterized by distinctive cursorial skeletal specializations. Owing to their abrupt appearance and the lack of transitional forms, the origin of the order is problematic. Descent from a "condylarth," specifically the arctocyonid Chriacus, has been suggested based on dental resemblances, but until now postcranial anatomy seemed to preclude close relationship between Arctocyonidae and Artiodactyla. A middle Paleocene specimen of a small arctocyonid (?Chriacus) reported here is much more similar to the oldest artiodactyl, Diacodexis, in the derived condition of the hindlimb, reviving the possibility that Artiodactyla evolved from an arctocyonid.

Ptolemaiida, a new order of Mammalia--with description of the cranium of Ptolemaia grangeri.

All records of the exotic mammalian family Ptolemaiidae are known from 182 m of section in the lower to middle parts of the upper Eocene and lower Oligocene Jebel Qatrani Formation, Fayum Depression, Egypt. Previous tentative assignments of ptolemaiid affinity have suggested that these animals are allied with the primitive suborder Pantolesta (currently placed in the order Cimolesta). Though perhaps ultimately derived from an unknown member of that group, the likelihood that ptolemaiids constitute a distinct group is considered, and analysis of all known materials of Ptolemaia, Qarunavus, and Cleopatrodon demonstrates that these genera belong in their own order, the Ptolemaiida, described here. The morphologically unique dentition and only known ptolemaiid cranium, that of Ptolemaia grangeri, is described. Although Qarunavus and Cleopatrodon show some similarities in primitive characters to European merialine Paroxyclaenidae (suborder Pantolesta), their affinities clearly lie with Ptolemaia and the Ptolemaiida.

Iniopterygia : a new order of Chondrichthyan fishes from the Pennsylvanian of North America / Rainer Zangerl [and] Gerard R. Case.

v.6(1973)

Cardipeltis; an early Devonian agnathan of the order Heterostraci / Robert H. Denison.

v.16:no.4(1966)

Order for the salary of Judah Monis, 1725 October 21

Small slip of paper containing an order from President Benjamin Wadsworth to Treasurer Edward Hutchinson to pay Judah Monis's salary for half of one year.

[ Order to the sheriff of Bucks County], 1731

An order to the sheriff of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, for twelve men to serve on a jury in the trial of John Borrowes, for an unspecified crime. Signed: Jeremiah Langhorne (justice of the peace); dated 14 June 1731. With seal. With this document (originally attached) is the list of jurors chosen to serve at the trial.

The autonomy of the EU legal order and the law-making activities of international organizations. Some examples regarding the Council most recent practice. Research Papers in Law 03/2012

[Introduction.] It is generally believed that while the principle of the autonomy of the EU legal order, in the sense of constitutional and institutional autonomy that is to say what concerns the autonomous decision-making of the EU, has been clearly strengthened by the most recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice (eg. Moxplant3, Intertanko or the Kadi/Al Baraakat judgements or the Opinion 1/2009 of the CJEU etc.) as well as, in my opinion, in many aspects by the Treaty of Lisbon, it is still valid to add that the principle of a favourable approach, stemming from the Court jurisprudence, for the enhanced openness of the EU legal order to international law has remained equally important for the EU4. On the other hand, it should be also seen that in a globalized world, and following the increased role of the EU as an international actor, its indispensable and crucial role concerning the creation of world (legal) order in many policy fields ( for example let's think about the G20 issues, the global economic and financial crisis, the role of the EU in promoting and protecting human rights worldwide, the implementation of the multilateral or regional conventional law, developed in the framework the UN (e.g. in the field of agriculture or environment etc) or what concerns the Kyoto process on climate change or the conservation of marine biological resources at international level etc), it seems reasonable and justified to submit that the influence, for example, of the law-making activities of the main stakeholder international organizations in the mentioned policy-areas on the EU (especially on the development of its constantly evolving legal order) or vice-versa the influence of the EU law-making practice on these international organizations is significant, in many aspects mutually interdependent and more and more remarkable. This tendency of the 21st century doesn't mean, however, in my view, that the notion of the autonomy of the EU legal order would have been weakened by this increasing interaction between international law and EU law over the passed years. This contribution is going to demonstrate and prove these departuring points by giving some concrete examples from the most recent practice of the Council (all occuring either in the second half of 2009 or after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty), and which relate to two very important policy areas in the EU, namely the protection of human rights and the Common Fishery Policy.

Die Gestaltung der Globalität. Schlüsselwörter der sozialen Ordnung (II) = The design of the global order: the keywords of social order. ZEI Discussion Paper C215, 2013

No abstract.

The importance of International Developments in the case-law of the European Court of Justice: Kadi and the autonomy of the EC legal order. Research Papers in Law, 1/2009

From the Introduction. In the USA, the debate is still ongoing as to whether and to what extent the Supreme Court could or should refer to foreign precedent, in particular in relation to constitutional matters such as the death penalty.1 In the EU, in particular the recent Kadi case of 20082 has triggered much controversy,3 thereby highlighting the opposite angle to a similar discussion. The focus of attention in Europe is namely to what extent the European Court of Justice (hereafter “ECJ”) could lawfully and rightfully refuse to plainly ‘surrender’ or to subordinate the EC legal system to UN law and obligations when dealing with human rights issues. This question becomes all the more pertinent in view of the fact that in the past the ECJ has been rather receptive and constructive in forging interconnectivity between the EC legal order and international law developments. A bench mark in that respect was undoubtedly the Racke case of 1998,4 where the ECJ spelled out the necessity for the EC to respect international law with direct reference to a ruling of the International Court of Justice. This judgment which was rendered 10 years earlier than Kadi equally concerned EC/EU economic sanctions taken in implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions. A major question is therefore whether it is at all possible, and if so to determine how, to reconcile those apparently conflicting judgments.