Air navigation services in Australia and the United States : a comparative case study

The central document governing the global organization of Air Navigation Services (ANS) is the Convention on International Civil Aviation, commonly referred to as the “Chicago Convention,” whose original version was signed in that city in 1944. In the Convention, Contracting States agreed to ensure the minimum standards of ANS established by ICAO, a specialized United Nations agency created by the Convention. Emanating from obligations under the Chicago Convention, ANS has traditionally provided by departments of national governments. However, there is a widespread trend toward transferring delivery of ANS services outside of line departments of national governments to independent agencies or corporations. The Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), which is the trade association for independent ANS providers, currently counts approximately 60 members, and is steadily growing. However, whatever delivery mechanisms are chosen, national governments remain ultimately responsible for ensuring that adequate ANS services are available. The provision by governments of ANS reflects the responsibility of the state for safety, international relations, and indirectly, the macroeconomic benefits of ensuring a sound infrastructure for aviation. ANS is a “public good” and an “essential good” provided to all aircraft using a country’s airfields and airspace. However, ANS also represents a service that directly benefits only a limited number of users, notably aircraft owners and operators. The idea that the users of the system, rather than the taxpaying public, should incur the costs associated with ANS provision is inherent in the commercialization process. However, ICAO sets out broad principles for the establishment of user charges, which member states are expected to comply with. ICAO states that only distance flown and aircraft weights are acceptable parameters for use in a charging system. These two factors are considered to be easy to measure, bear a reasonable relationship to the value of service received, and do not discriminate due to factors such as where the flight originated or the nation of aircraft registration.

Patents, Ethics and Stem Cell Research : The Case of hESC Innovation in Australia, Europe and the United States

Embryonic stem cells offer potentially a ground-breaking insight into health and diseases and are said to offer hope in discovering cures for many ailments unimaginable few years ago. Human embryonic stem cells are undifferentiated, immature cells that possess an amazing ability to develop into almost any body cell such as heart muscle, bone, nerve and blood cells and possibly even organs in due course. This remarkable feature, enabling embryonic stem cells to proliferate indefinitely in vitro (in a test tube), has branded them as a so-called miracle cure . Their potential use in clinical applications provides hope to many sufferers of debilitating and fatal medical conditions. However, the emergence of stem cell research has resulted in intense debates about its promises and dangers. On the one hand, advocates hail its potential, ranging from alleviating and even curing fatal and debilitating diseases such as Parkinson s, diabetes, heart ailments and so forth. On the other hand, opponents decry its dangers, drawing attention to the inherent risks of human embryo destruction, cloning for research purposes and reproductive cloning eventually. Lately, however, the policy battles surrounding human embryonic stem cell innovation have shifted from being a controversial research to scuffles within intellectual property rights. In fact, the ability to obtain patents represents a pivotal factor in the economic success or failure of this new biotechnology. Although, stem cell patents tend to more or less satisfy the standard patentability requirements, they also raise serious ethical and moral questions about the meaning of the exclusions on ethical or moral grounds as found in European and to an extent American and Australian patent laws. At present there is a sort of a calamity over human embryonic stem cell patents in Europe and to an extent in Australia and the United States. This in turn has created a sense of urgency to engage all relevant parties in the discourse on how best to approach patenting of this new form of scientific innovation. In essence, this should become a highly favoured patenting priority. To the contrary, stem cell innovation and its reliance on patent protection risk turmoil, uncertainty, confusion and even a halt on not only stem cell research but also further emerging biotechnology research and development. The patent system is premised upon the fundamental principle of balance which ought to ensure that the temporary monopoly awarded to the inventor equals that of the social benefit provided by the disclosure of the invention. Ensuring and maintaining this balance within the patent system when patenting human embryonic stem cells is of crucial contemporary relevance. Yet, the patenting of human embryonic stem cells raises some fundamental moral, social and legal questions. Overall, the present approach of patenting human embryonic stem cell related inventions is unsatisfactory and ineffective. This draws attention to a specific question which provides for a conceptual framework for this work. That question is the following: how can the investigated patent offices successfully deal with patentability of human embryonic stem cells? This in turn points at the thorny issue of application of the morality clause in this field. In particular, the interpretation of the exclusions on ethical or moral grounds as found in Australian, American and European legislative and judicial precedents. The Thesis seeks to compare laws and legal practices surrounding patentability of human embryonic stem cells in Australia and the United States with that of Europe. By using Europe as the primary case study for lessons and guidance, the central goal of the Thesis then becomes the determination of the type of solutions available to Europe with prospects to apply such to Australia and the United States. The Dissertation purports to define the ethical implications that arise with patenting human embryonic stem cells and intends to offer resolutions to the key ethical dilemmas surrounding patentability of human embryonic stem cells and other morally controversial biotechnology inventions. In particular, the Thesis goal is to propose a functional framework that may be used as a benchmark for an informed discussion on the solution to resolving ethical and legal tensions that come with patentability of human embryonic stem cells in Australian, American and European patent worlds. Key research questions that arise from these objectives and which continuously thread throughout the monograph are: 1. How do common law countries such as Australia and the United States approach and deal with patentability of human embryonic stem cells in their jurisdictions? These practices are then compared to the situation in Europe as represented by the United Kingdom (first two chapters), the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Patent Office decisions (Chapter 3 onwards) in order to obtain a full picture of the present patenting procedures on the European soil. 2. How are ethical and moral considerations taken into account at patent offices investigated when assessing patentability of human embryonic stem cell related inventions? In order to assess this part, the Thesis evaluates how ethical issues that arise with patent applications are dealt with by: a) Legislative history of the modern patent system from its inception in 15th Century England to present day patent laws. b) Australian, American and European patent offices presently and in the past, including other relevant legal precedents on the subject matter. c) Normative ethical theories. d) The notion of human dignity used as the lowest common denominator for the interpretation of the European morality clause. 3. Given the existence of the morality clause in form of Article 6(1) of the Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions which corresponds to Article 53(a) European Patent Convention, a special emphasis is put on Europe as a guiding principle for Australia and the United States. Any room for improvement of the European morality clause and Europe s current manner of evaluating ethical tensions surrounding human embryonic stem cell inventions is examined. 4. A summary of options (as represented by Australia, the United States and Europe) available as a basis for the optimal examination procedure of human embryonic stem cell inventions is depicted, whereas the best of such alternatives is deduced in order to create a benchmark framework. This framework is then utilised on and promoted as a tool to assist Europe (as represented by the European Patent Office) in examining human embryonic stem cell patent applications. This method suggests a possibility of implementing an institution solution. 5. Ultimately, a question of whether such reformed European patent system can be used as a founding stone for a potential patent reform in Australia and the United States when examining human embryonic stem cells or other morally controversial inventions is surveyed. The author wishes to emphasise that the guiding thought while carrying out this work is to convey the significance of identifying, analysing and clarifying the ethical tensions surrounding patenting human embryonic stem cells and ultimately present a solution that adequately assesses patentability of human embryonic stem cell inventions and related biotechnologies. In answering the key questions above, the Thesis strives to contribute to the broader stem cell debate about how and to which extent ethical and social positions should be integrated into the patenting procedure in pluralistic and morally divided democracies of Europe and subsequently Australia and the United States.

Trade secrets: a ten year overview of the illegal import of sea turtle products into the United States

For more than 25 years all sea turtle products have been prohibited from international commerce by the 170-member nations of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Sea turtles continue to be threatened by direct take (including poaching) and illegal trade despite multi-national protection efforts. Although take may contribute significantly to sea turtle decline, illegal take is difficult to measure since there are few quantified records associated with legal fisheries and fewer still for illegal take (poaching). We can, however, quantify one portion of the illegal sea turtle trade by determining how many illegal products were seized at United States ports of entry over a recent 10-year period. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) oversees the import and export of wildlife and wildlife products, ensuring that wildlife trade complies with United States laws and international treaties. Additionally, the USFWS has legal authority to target suspected illegal wildlife activity through undercover and field investigations. In an effort to assess the scale of illegal sea turtle take and trade, we have conducted a 10-year (1994 – 2003) review of the law enforcement database maintained by the USFWS. This database tracks the number and type of wildlife cases, the quantity of seized products, and the penalties assessed against violators. These data are minimum estimates of the sea turtle products passing through the United States borders, as smuggled wildlife is oftentimes not detected.

The resilience of democratic institutions in Britain, Australia and the United States under conditions of total war

To what extent are democratic institutions resilient when nation states mobilise for war? Normative and empirical political theorists have long argued that wars strengthen the executive and threaten constitutional politics. In modern democracies, national assemblies are supposed to hold the executive to account by demanding explanations for events and policies; and by scrutinising, reviewing and, if necessary, revising legislative proposals intended to be binding on the host society or policies that have been implemented already. This article examines the extent to which the British and Australian parliaments and the United States Congress held their wartime executives to account during World War II. The research finds that under conditions approaching those of total war, these democratic institutions not only continued to exist, but also proved to be resilient in representing public concerns and holding their executives to account, however imperfectly and notwithstanding delegating huge powers. In consequence, executives—more so British and Australian ministers than President Roosevelt—were required to be placatory as institutional and political tensions within national assemblies and between assemblies and executives continued, and assemblies often asserted themselves. In short, even under the most onerous wartime conditions, democratic politics mattered and democratic institutions were resilient.

Should the U.S. adapt to the world? The first debate on american exceptionalism and its impact on the founding of the United States

This paper aims at putting into perspective the recent, post 9/11 debate on the United States��� alleged exceptionalism and its impact on the definition of American foreign policy. It reminds the readers that the United States was born as a result of a similar debate, at a time when a crucial choice for its future was to be made. Indeed, the Founding Fathers discarded the revolutionary idea that America was altogether different from other (European) nations and, as such, could succeed in saving republicanism and concentrate on domestic affairs. As Gordon Wood and Harvey Mansfield have shown, the 1787 version of republicanism stood as a departure from its earlier version, and such a change was necessary to the creation of a full-fledged federation, therefore paving the way to the current powerful Federal Republic. The early failure of the exceptionalist creed did not cause its disappearance, as the contemporary form of exceptionalism demonstrates, but created conditions that made an enduring and powerful influence very difficult.

Current United States stem cell policy considerations and a recommendation for an alternative policy based on guidelines from existing international policies

Embryonic stem cell research is a widely debated topic in modern politics and religion. Differing views on the fetal rights conflict with the rights of an embryo. Those who believe an embryo has the same human qualities as a fetus accordingly believe embryonic stem cell research is unethical because it destroys a potential human life. However, scientists advocate the embryo does not have human qualities and should be used for valuable research in the stem cell field. Stem cell research may lead to vast developments in medical treatments, including cancer and brain conditions and injuries that are currently incurable. ^ The current stem cell policy introduced by President Bush in 2001 in an attempt to balance the moral issues with the need for scientific research has broad negative implications on the furthering of stem cell research. There is a limited diversity of available stem cell lines, there may be constitutional issues, there is an increasing disparity between the public and private research spheres, and the U.S. is struggling to maintain its scientific community. The U.S. must develop a new stem cell research policy that will balance the interest of science and public health with the moral issues that concern the public. ^ The United Kingdom allows researchers great liberty in conducting research, permitting the creation of embryos for the sole purpose of research, while Germany is equally conservative in their laws, as their policies support the philosophy that all embryos deserve the protection of full life. The United States should adopt a policy that takes the "middle ground" approach and permit research on excess embryos created for IVF purposes, rather than simply discarding those potentially valuable research tools. ^

Letters to George Simpson, 1796, 1806

Two letters to the cashier of the Bank of the United States requesting that funds be transferred to Andrew Bayard in Philadelphia, so that Paterson could receive his salary as associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Statement by Herbert Brownell, Jr., attorney general of the United States before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on S. J. Res. 1 (83d Cong.) a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to the making of treaties and executive agreements, and S. J. Res. 43 (83d Cong.) a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the legal effect of certain treaties.

Mode of access: Internet.

Commentaries on the law of suretyship, and the rights and obligations of the parties thereto, and herein of obligations in solido, under the laws of England, Scotland, and other states of Europe, the British colonies, and United States of America, and on the conflict of those laws.

"List of continental authors cited": p. [xi]-xvi; "American authorities": p. [xvii]-xviii.

The Constitution of the United States of America, analysis and interpretation : 1976 supplement. Annotations of cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to July 6, 1976 /

Mode of access: Internet.

Status of Puerto Rico : report of the United States-Puerto Rico Commission on the Status of Puerto Rico, August, 1966.

Mode of access: Internet.

The Constitution of the United States of America,

Mode of access: Internet.

The Federal and State constitutions : colonial charters, and other organic laws of the states, territories, and colonies now or heretofore forming the United States of America. /

List of authorities: v. 1, p. xv-xxxv.

Sources of the Constitution of the United States, considered in relation to colonial and English history,

Mode of access: Internet.

Address to the people of the United States on the subject of slavery.

Mode of access: Internet.