The Validity of Derivatives Contracts. Legal Doctrine as a Vehicle of Dialogues on ‘Speculation’

Resolving controversial issues related to the content of evaluative features in the context of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is important for the development of legal science and practice, since increased integration within Europe requires national governments and judicial systems to pay increased attention to the practice of supranational bodies. The purpose of this study is to analyse the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, aimed at determining the content of the evaluative features in the context of human rights. For this purpose, the author uses the methods of legal literature analysis, comparative analysis of case law from different countries, synthesis, comparison, and modelling, as well as logical and systematic approaches to the analysis of court decisions. The article establishes that the assessment criteria are an important tool for determining human rights violations and require an objective and proportionate approach. Attention is focused on the role of the European Court of Human Rights in ensuring a balance between freedom of expression and the protection of human rights. The author identifies the need to adapt concepts to digital environments and take into account new challenges. The author analyses the process of determining the evaluative features and demonstrates its significance for establishing the scope of human rights protection. The author identifies different approaches of the European Court of Justice to determining the content of evaluative features in human rights judgments. The emphasis is placed on the interpretation of such concepts as “adequacy”, “excessiveness” and “necessity” in the context of human rights restrictions. The author identifies changes in the court's approach to these concepts over time and changes in the social and political context. The study is important for an in-depth understanding of the interpretation of human rights by the European Court of Human Rights, as well as for the formation of a unified methodology for interpreting the evaluative features in the judgments of courts of different jurisdictions

In international child abduction cases, two international legal frameworks interact with each other. On the one hand, the Hague Child Abduction Convention provides that the abducted child must be speedily taken back (unless an exception applies); which is seen as being in the best interests of the child in general. On the other hand, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provides that the best interests of the individual child must be a paramount consideration in all actions concerning him or her. The aim of this article is to examine how the case law of Belgium, France and Switzerland integrates the obligation of a speedy return and the obligation of safeguarding the individual child’s best interests. The article focuses on how judges determine the child’s best interests when assessing whether the separation between the child and the taking parent poses a grave risk for the child in the sense of Article 13.1.b Hague Child Abduction Convention. Looking at the analysed case law, we see an integrated approach: the courts of the chosen countries manage to take the best interests of the individual child into account during their consideration of the return proceedings and the grounds for refusal.

This book shows why courts are essential in the law of finance. The legal principles developed in courts’ case law provide finance with a firm legal basis and sufficient elasticity to evolve. This book, through an extensive and comparative analysis of case law in Europe and the United States, analyses how courts have shaped the main concepts and institutions in the law of finance. In public law, the book analyses the justiciability of disputes against public actors, or the role of discretion and mandates of monetary, regulatory, supervisory or crisis management authorities, as well as the rights of financial institutions, and the interpretation of regulatory concepts. In private law, the book analyses judicial creation of securities liability for misstatements, the role of financial contracts, and their enforceability, interpretation, and relationship with mandatory regulations, or the intricacies of property and insolvency issues in a financial context. The book also analyses critically the current state of the resolution of financial disputes in the EU, and suggests some avenues of reform.

The analyses provided in this volume show at once the potential and the limitations of procedural review as a suitable approach for European Courts having to decide on fundamental rights cases. The question arises as to what form of procedural review would be the most appropriate for the European Courts to apply. The comparative analysis of case law shows that a great variety of approaches can be conceived. Hence there is no straightforward and easy answer to the main research question of this book, which is to what extent and how the 'argument from procedure' can be used in fundamental rights case law of the European Courts in a legitimate and practical manner.

Comparative constitutional case law presents the analyst with a quite bewildering array of precedents regarding the validity, in terms of a constitutional property guarantee, of state interferences with private property interests. This chapter suggests an avenue for avoiding at least some of the confusions in this field, by introducing a number of distinctions that highlight the dangers of using decisions in one area as authority for cases in another. It focuses on a limited category of cases, defined by three considerations. The considerations include: the property in question consists of some kind of intangible commercial right or interest and the purpose of the state interference with the said property is to regulate, in terms of the state's police power, the use and exploitation of that property in some way or another. They also include: the effect of the regulation in question is so harsh or extreme that the property interest is lost, destroyed or rendered worthless in the process.

The atrocious abuses committed under South America's dictators resulted in a wave of amnesties. Following transitions to democracy, challenges from victims and civil society unpicked several of these amnesties, leading to hundreds of perpetrators facing prosecution. These developments prompted far-reaching claims in academic literature and policy reports regarding the significance of the erosion of South America's amnesties for shaping international legal norms and policy preferences on amnesties within the region and beyond. This article draws on a comparative analysis of case law from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and national courts as well as legislative changes to argue that there is a regional trend to move away from broad, unconditional amnesties enacted during or after dictatorial rule. However, it notes that this is not universal across the region, nor does it represent a rejection of all forms of amnesty. The article then tests the claims being made in the literature regarding the significance of the regional trend on the legality, durability and desirability of amnesties. It finds that there is little evidence to support claims that the regional developments are indicative of a broader normative shift. It concludes by identifying the risks posed by regional overreach.

Part 1: Countryside, conservation and charities - working together for access, J. Rowan-Robinson the right to roam - an empty dream?, christine Willmore reforming property rights for nature conservation, Christopher P. Rogers reforming the law on charity trading, Peter Luxton. Part 2: is apartment ownership genuine ownership?, C.G. van der Merwe aspects of condominium law in the Bahamas, Gilbert Kodilinye caveat commonholds, Peter Smith the proposed commonhold association - a company law perspective, Letitia Crabb. Part 3 Comparative and international property law: are property rights so simple in Europe?, Geoffrey Samule limitations on constitutional property rights, Tom Allen the constitutional property clause and police power regulation of intangible commercial property - a comparative analysis of case law, A.J. van der Walt the reform of South African land law in its Roman-Dutch context - new wine?, D.L. Carey Miller extending security of tenure in South Africa - labour tenants and farm workers, Juanita Pienaar Finland's new electronic title and mortgage register, Matti Ilmari Niemi.

Background: This paper explores the legal field of surrogacy from a Central European perspective, focusing on how countries such as Austria, Germany, and Switzerland address the recognition of parental status established abroad. While the prevailing attitude among Central European states is to prohibit surrogacy within their national laws, there is an increasing tendency to bypass these bans by seeking surrogacy services abroad. This phenomenon, termed reproductive tourism, raises complex legal questions about the recognition of foreign parental status determinations. Methods: The methods used include a comprehensive review of international and autonomous national legal rules as well as a comparative analysis of case law from Central European courts regarding cross-border surrogacy and parenthood recognition. The study examines legal controversies employing Austrian family law as an example to assess highly topical issues arising from surrogacy. It incorporates data from various legal sources, including the Austrian Constitutional Court, the German Federal Court of Justice, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, and the European Court of Human Rights. Results and conclusions: The findings reveal significant differences between Austria, Germany, and Switzerland regarding the recognition of parental status established by way of surrogacy abroad. While supreme court decisions in these countries tend to prioritise the best interests of the child – often recognising foreign surrogacy arrangements to avoid leaving children without legal parents – their judicial approaches differ considerably. The Austrian Constitutional Court adopts a more inclusive approach by accepting foreign determinations from any authority, such as birth certificates, under the concept of automatic recognition. In contrast, the German and Swiss supreme courts acknowledge only formal court decisions. For cross-border surrogacy cases that do not fulfil this requirement, these countries apply the national law of the child's habitual residence or, as a fallback, the law of the intended parents’ country of origin. Since both German and Swiss law categorically forbid surrogacy, only the genetic father is typically recognised, while the intended mother is directed to adoption. This aligns with the opinion of the ECtHR, which still considers the method of establishing parenthood to be within the sovereignty of a state. This article advocates for a balanced approach that respects both the legal principles of national states and the fundamental rights of children born through an arrangement with a surrogate mother in another country.

This book has three goals: to enhance understanding of administrative law; to guide future development of the law; and to justify the core features of the contemporary law of judicial review of administrative action. Around the common law world, the law of judicial review of administrative action has changed dramatically in recent decades, accelerating a centuries-long process of incremental evolution. This book offers a fresh framework for understanding the core features of contemporary administrative law. Through comparative analysis of case law from Australia, Canada, England, Ireland and New Zealand, Dr Daly develops an interpretive approach by reference to four values: individual self-realisation, good administration, electoral legitimacy and decisional autonomy. The interaction of this plurality of values explains the structure of the vast field of judicial review of administrative action: institutional structures, procedural fairness, substantive review, remedies, restrictions on remedies and the scope of judicial review, everything from the rule against bias to jurisdictional error to the application of judicial review principles to non-statutory bodies. Addressing this wide array of subjects in detail, Dr Daly demonstrates how his pluralist approach, with the values being employed in a complementary and balanced fashion, can enhance academics’, students’, practitioners’ and judges’ understanding of administrative law. Furthermore, this pluralist approach is capable of guiding the future development of the law of judicial review of administrative action, a point illustrated by a careful analysis of the unsettled doctrinal area of legitimate expectation. Dr Daly closes by arguing that his values-based, pluralist framework supports the legitimacy of contemporary administrative law which although sometimes called into question in fact facilitates the flourishing of individuals, of public administration and of the liberal democratic system.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of e-commerce, protecting intellectual property rights, particularly in the realm of photography, has become increasingly vital. This article delves into the complex issue of copyright infringement on e-commerce platforms, with a specific focus on the concept of intermediary liability. While e-commerce platforms offer unparalleled convenience and global reach to consumers, they also present formidable challenges in upholding the rights of content creators, especially photographers. The article uniquely emphasizes the concept of intermediary liability in the context of e-commerce platforms. This focus is particularly relevant given the widespread use of these platforms in today’s digital marketplace. One of the significant contributions of this study is the comparative analysis of case law from different jurisdictions concerning intermediary liability for copyright infringement. This cross-jurisdictional examination helps illustrate how courts in various countries address similar issues, offering insights into potential harmonization of legal standards and guiding principles for future legislation and litigation. The research identifies specific challenges faced by photographers and copyright holders, such as the difficulty in monitoring vast quantities of online content and enforcing rights across multiple jurisdictions. The article sheds light on the broader impact of copyright infringement on the photography industry. The research offers practical recommendations and strategies to address copyright infringement on e-commerce platforms. These include leveraging automated image recognition technologies, establishing clear guidelines and protocols for sellers, and implementing efficient mechanisms for reporting and removing infringing content. Received: 11 March 2024 | Revised: 9 July 2024 | Accepted: 24 July 2024 Conflicts of Interest The author declares that she has no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement The data that support this work are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author. Author Contribution Statement Anna Pokrovskaya: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

The employment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in legal operations raised concerns about ethical challenges and their potential consequences. Among other issues, hallucinations refer to a phenomenon whereby AI systems generate plausible but inaccurate or fabricated responses. In legal matters, where precision and compliance with authorities are paramount, inconsistency with legal doctrines and judicial precedents may lead to wrong legal advice or decisions. AI tools such as ChatGPT and Lexis +AI exhibit human-like intelligence. Still, their fabricated responses could lead to real-world consequences such as professional misconduct resulting in civil liabilities. This article contributes to the following aspects: it compares judicial scholarship evolved on AI hallucinations in the USA, Pakistan, UK, Australia, and Canada. It examines the standing orders and policy guidelines set by the bar and bench constituting patchwork with competing outcomes. The article emphasizes uniform and comprehensive policy guidelines for the responsible use of generative AI tools in legal operations.

As artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly contributes to the creation of original content, legal systems are under pressure to determine whether and how such outputs can be protected by copyright. While much of the academic debate focuses on future legislative reforms, courts and existing legal frameworks are already being tested by real disputes. This paper examines how different jurisdictions, namely, the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, Australia, and China, approach the copyright protection of AI-generated works, both at the level of underlying legal doctrine and through judicial interpretation. The first part of the paper outlines the key principles of copyright law in each system, including definitions of authorship, standards of originality, and relevant exceptions or limitations that may apply to AI training and output. The second part shifts to case law, examining how courts have applied or challenged these principles when addressing AI-generated work. In doing so, the paper focuses on three core legal issues: whether AI-generated works can meet originality thresholds, how authorship and ownership are assigned, and how the expression–idea dichotomy is interpreted in this context. It is within this judicial context that the present study situates its analysis, using case law as the primary lens to examine how legal systems are grappling with the growing presence of AI in creative processes. By comparing these legal systems and judicial approaches, the paper demonstrates that while human authorship remains a consistent requirement, some courts have begun to accommodate more nuanced forms of human–machine collaboration. Ultimately, the study argues that in the absence of clear legislative reform, courts are actively shaping the emerging boundaries of copyright in the age of generative AI. In addition, this paper contributes to the growing literature on AI and copyright by providing a doctrinal analysis grounded in case law, revealing not only how courts are applying traditional concepts to new technologies, but also where doctrinal tensions are beginning to emerge.

This article critiques the limitations of traditional legal approaches to the human right to food, which often reduce it to a single dimension. It advances a four-fold interpretation, distinguishing the right to be free from hunger, the right to adequate food, food security, and food sovereignty. The aim is to move beyond theory by proposing a functional legal framework for each dimension, detailing the normative foundations, state duties, and practical mechanisms. Through a comparative analysis of treaties, constitutions, legal doctrine, and case law, the article develops a typology that clarifies legal roles, rights-holders, and state obligations. Its primary contribution is to present an integrated, operational model that strengthens the justiciability and real application of the human right to food, especially for vulnerable groups. Ultimately, it offers concrete tools for policymakers, judges, and advocates, bridging the gap between theory and practice in international human rights law.

Corporate criminal behaviour has emerged as a significant threat to economic stability, social trust, and ethical business practices in the globalised era. Historically, criminal law targeted individuals, with corporations largely shielded by legal doctrines that resisted attributing culpability to artificial entities. Over the past few decades, however, the paradigm has shifted. Legal systems worldwide have progressively recognised the need to hold corporations criminally liable for misconduct ranging from financial fraud and environmental harm to human rights violations. This paper examines the evolving role of criminal law in controlling corporate behaviour, with a particular focus on the Indian context and comparative insights from jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Through a doctrinal review and critical analysis of statutory developments, case law, and enforcement mechanisms, the study explores how criminal law has moved beyond punitive sanctions to incorporate compliance incentives, corporate probation, and whistleblower protections. It further analyses the interplay between deterrence, corporate governance reforms, and stakeholder activism in shaping responsible business conduct. While criminal law remains a vital tool for accountability, challenges such as enforcement capacity, judicial delays, and the risk of over-criminalisation persist. The paper concludes with recommendations for strengthening the deterrent and corrective potential of corporate criminal liability through integrated, adaptive, and globally coordinated legal strategies.

Book Review: The Comparative Anatomy of Corporate Law