Replacing the medical member of the first-tier Tribunal (Mental health) with a clinical member for tribunal applications and references made under the Mental Health Act 1983 (England and Wales).

This article deals with the principle of good faith in contracts, aiming to determine its actual scope in arm’s length agreements. It posits that the principle’s broad expression may lead to judicial overreach, potentially supplanting the parties will, and above all, exposing them to unnecessary litigation. To test these assumptions, this principle is analyzed from its origins in Roman law, its divergent evolution in common law and civil law systems and its regulation in the new Argentine Civil and Commercial Code. Subsequently, a distintion is made between subjective and objective good faith, the latter being, in general, that which is applicable to contracts. The article discusses the functions of good faith or, in other words, the purposes that good faith serves in contracts. It then sets forth the criticisms made the principle of good faith in contracts, pertaining to its lack of certainty, on the one hand, and the excessive power it grants to judges, on the other. Finally, the study develops a rationale regarding what the scope of this principle should be in arm’s length agreements, and it answers the question, less obvious than it seems at first glance, of whether the parties can agree not to have their contract reviewed under criteria linked to good faith.

the sectoral codification of law in comparative studies is considered to be a unique and difficult achievement of the Western European legal culture of modern times, which in the 19th century defined and in many ways still defines the style of Romano-Germanic law. As a rule, codes are recognized as a triumph of a rational view of law, a pillar of its rational and legal legitimacy. However, is this really the truth? Are there any transcendental elements in the codification? The methodology of the paper implies the search for an answer to this question based on functional analysis, that is, the identification of statements about a codified law that are untrue and devoid of real consequences for the legal system. The purpose of the paper is to identify the legal myths that accompanied the development, adoption, interpretation, and application of Europe’s leading civil codes (FCC 1804 and GСС 1896). The author argues and substantiates that behind the rational facade of codification there are myths of the “sacred” authority of the code, its completeness and consistency, as well as the superiority of its abstract norms over the casuistry of case law. The conclusion of the paper is the thesis that these myths have been the ideological source of a law-centered, holistic legal system of nation-states in Europe since the 19th century and have also led to a wide reception of codes in a wide variety of non-Western jurisdictions (with the exception of common and customary law countries).

UN and other international organizations, applying a variety of strategic methods and regulatory instruments to create and implement effective international cybersecurity standards. The increasing risks associated with cyberterrorism, cyberintelligence, and interference in the sovereignty of states through cyberspace necessitate expanded international cooperation. Consequently, the UN’s role in coordinating efforts to establish common principles and rules of conduct for states in the cyber environment is growing, reflected in the adoption of new resolutions and the expansion of the mandate of the Open-Ended Working Group on Cybersecurity. Structural, logical, and dialectical approaches were used to analyze Kazakhstan’s cybersecurity legislation. The theoretical foundation of the study was formed by examining international law, academic papers, and materials from international organizations. International commitments, particularly within the United Nations, are key to the development and evolution of Kazakhstan’s cyber policy. Active engagement in international projects, aligning national legislation with international standards, and implementing strategic programs contribute to enhancing the state’s cybersecurity and its integration into the global digital community. A significant factor in this process is the incorporation of international law into national legislation.

Cross-border e-commerce has evolved from a transactional model into a strategic channel for multinational companies seeking global expansion, brand reputation, and longterm profitability. However, operating across multiple jurisdictions poses complex legal challenges involving taxation, consumer protection, data privacy, product liability, and intellectual property. This study argues that legal compliance is not merely a cost or regulatory obligation, but a strategic instrument that enhances institutional legitimacy, builds consumer trust, and facilitates market access. By examining diverse legal frameworks—civil law, common law, Islamic law, and hybrid systems—the study highlights how compliance requirements vary across jurisdictions. The case of Amazon illustrates how compliance can be transformed from a reactive legal defense into a proactive governance capability through the use of AI monitoring, supply chain traceability, and platform-based risk prevention. These efforts elevate compliance into a source of brand credibility, operational efficiency, and even participation in global rule-making.

The article presents the results of a linguistic-axiological study of the nominative paradigm of British academic legal discourse, considered with regard to its linguistic and cultural specificity and professional orientation. The aim of the study is to identify the composition and structure of the system of legal value dominants represented in the nominative paradigm of British academic legal discourse, taking into account the specifics of their linguistic manifestation. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that it has, for the first time, documented a six-component, nationally marked axiosphere characteristic of a narrow professional type of British discourse, identified its structural principle, and clarified the features of its linguistic marking. In addition, for the first time, a detailed analysis of the frequency ratio of axiological translations in professionally oriented educational nominations was carried out and the relative parity of value dominants within the system was revealed. The results obtained prove that the titles functioning within British academic legal discourse play a significant role in marking the axiological principles of law. It has been established that such value dominants as the rule of law, common law, independence of the judiciary, equity, freedom, and tolerance are verbalized within the studied subtype of discourse.

ABSTRACT Interpreting in migration and refugee review hearings is essential for ensuring procedural fairness for linguistically diverse applicants. Given the limited access to direct evaluations of interpreting performance in judicial settings, judicial decisions on appellate cases provide an important source for research. They not only foreground the perspectives of interpreting service users – appellants and their legal representatives, but also reveal how courts assess interpreting inadequacies in relation to procedural fairness, which is particularly important in common law jurisdictions where precedent plays a central role. This article quantitatively and qualitatively analyses 149 decisions made by Federal Court of Australia (2012–2022). Approximately 7.4% of interpreting-related appeal grounds were accepted. Interpreting related claims were grouped into three categories and eight subcategories. Legal representation was found to play an important role in the framing and substantiation of these claims. Analysis of these claims and their rulings underscores the exceptionally high standards of interpreting accuracy required in legal settings, affirming the need for specialised legal interpreter training, more efforts to engage the highest-qualified interpreters, more training for interpreters and Members, as well as more consistent documentation of interpreting-related factors in judicial decisions.

The UK government has recently faced mounting criticism for what is widely perceived as a ‘hurt first, fix later’ approach to implementing algorithmic tools in the welfare system. While Australia has not yet moved in this direction in the wake of the Robodebt scandal, it could still potentially do so. The question this article addresses is one of effective regulation. While various strategies have been explored to tackle challenges arising from the adoption of algorithmic systems in welfare fraud investigation in recent years, this article follows the approach adopted in the Robodebt class action in Australia in proposing the tort of negligence as a source of common law regulation in the era of algorithmic systems. It first critiques the effectiveness of alternative contemporary mechanisms and, second, shows how duty to take reasonable care can be framed to regulate both the design and the subsequent operation of algorithmic systems. Finally, it considers two challenges to the proposal and argues that, despite these challenges, the tort offers a valuable opportunity to enhance fairness, legitimacy, and equity in both system design and regulatory practice, while also mitigating litigation risks.

In June 2020, the National Security Law took effect in Hong Kong. A sui generis piece of legislation which was directly promulgated by Beijing in the jurisdiction, its implications on constitutional and criminal law have been the focus of academic commentary. This comment looks at the latest development in judicial application of this law in HKSAR v Ng Ching-Hang , which dealt with ‘conspiracy to commit subversion’ for the first time. Though a first-instance decision, its verdict and sentencing judgments are enlightening as to how judges navigate the increasingly complex landscape of nationally and domestically enacted security legislation. While the court insists upon using ‘common law’ methods to interpret and apply the law and its penalties, the judgments reveal an approach which prioritises national security over fundamental common law values such as legal certainty and separation of powers. The implications of this ‘national security first’ approach for future jurisprudence are discussed.

The abolition of the previous common law/statutory regime for admitting bad character evidence (BCE) and consolidation of the law into the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) brought into existence a definition of BCE that requires ‘reprehensible behaviour' or the commission of an offence so any evidence suggesting homosexuality on the part of a defendant must be dealt with outside of the statutory regime (where the conduct is not illegal/the commission of an offence). This is undoubtedly positive but is not without consequences for the admissibility of homosexuality. The case analysis herein reveals that only conviction-based evidence of homosexuality benefits from the admissibility safeguards that complement the gateways to admissibility of BCE within the CJA 2003 and promote fairness/consistency in approach. The common law requires relevance and is not without an exclusionary discretion, but insights gained herein suggest this rarely keeps evidence of homosexuality out of the trial where it has any explanatory value or prevents jury speculation/being misled as to the defendant’s family life. With respect to non-conviction-based evidence of homosexuality, the article identifies one significant theme emerging in the existing case law - an emerging over-reliance upon the jury direction as a means of reducing prejudice brought about by admission. The article identifies shortcomings in the current approach that result in under-utilisation of guidance on what the content of such a direction should be despite its inclusion in the Crown Court Compendium and despite identification of an ideal template in the case of IJ [2011] EWCA Crim 2734. The availability of suggested templates for reform in the apposite section of the Crown Court Compendium suggests further action is needed, and the article draws upon jurisdictions such as Victoria and Scotland in support of an argument for legislative intervention, mandating inclusion of the compendium guidance in (existing or new) legislation to ensure such guidance is provided to a jury in order to assist them in reconciling evidence of this kind.

When lawyers speak of comparative law, they mostly think of the ‘civil’ and the ‘common law’ − two legal traditions that are widely viewed as isolated from one another. In the realm of international arbitration, however, these traditions inevitably collide. Accordingly, authors have rightly referred to arbitration as a ‘real-life laboratory for the development of a procedural Esperanto’. But much of the academic work emerging from this laboratory seems to draw primarily on anecdote and the authors’ personal experiences. This paper moves beyond such anecdotal approaches and examines the alleged civil v. common law divide empirically. Based on generative interviews with twenty-six of the world’s ‘most in demand’ arbitrators, it concludes that, within international arbitration, significant differences between civil and common law have largely faded over time. By contrast, experienced international arbitrators apply a de facto ‘Uniform Code of Arbitral Procedure’. Exploring the content of this framework − and borrowing from Francis Fukuyama’s famous theory − the article argues that international arbitration today has reached its own ‘End of History’. That is, the common law − including many of its typical features − has triumphed and now represents the dominant approach in international arbitration.

In the contemporary world, criminal justice is undergoing a period of fundamental transformation. Innovative approaches aimed at restoring justice through dialogue and reconciliation are replacing the exclusively punitive paradigm. Criminal mediation, as a key instrument of restorative justice, opens new horizons for resolving conflicts arising from crimes, allowing victims and offenders to meet face-to-face in pursuit of healing and justice. This study presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of three fundamentally different models of criminal mediation that have emerged within various legal traditions worldwide. The analysis encompasses the American model of adversarial restorative justice, with its emphasis on party autonomy and community participation; the German Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich system, distinguished by its systematicity and professional standards; and evolving reconciliation models in post-Soviet countries, where traditional approaches to dispute resolution meet modern legal reforms. The methodological foundation comprises an interdisciplinary approach that combines doctrinal analysis of legal norms with empirical research of practical outcomes. The study is based on an extensive array of statistical data, including German TOA statistics covering more than 7,000 cases, reports from the U.S. Department of Justice, and unique data from Russia, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine for the period 2015-2023. The research findings reveal a fascinating picture of diverse approaches to implementing restorative justice. The American model demonstrates outstanding flexibility and high victim satisfaction rates (85-95%), the German system impresses with its systematicity and stable results (70% successful completions), while post-Soviet models, despite more modest indicators (45-60%), represent a unique experience of integrating international standards with local justice traditions. The study convincingly demonstrates that the choice of legal tradition does not merely influence procedural aspects of mediation, but determines the very philosophy of the approach to restoring justice. Continental law systems create a solid institutional foundation for the systematic development of mediation, and common law systems ensure maximum adaptability to participants’ needs. At the same time, post-Soviet jurisdictions offer new opportunities to synthesize diverse legal cultures into a unified, harmonious system. The comparative analysis concludes that while no single model emerges as universally superior, effective criminal mediation implementation requires systematic legal integration, professional development, and adaptation to local contexts. The study proposes an integrated model that synthesizes the strengths of all three approaches while addressing their respective limitations, emphasizing the need for comprehensive enabling legislation, professional standards with community involvement, and graduated implementation strategies tailored to specific legal and cultural environments. This research makes a substantial contribution to the development of comparative jurisprudence and restorative justice theory, offering scientifically grounded recommendations for improving existing models and creating new criminal mediation frameworks across various legal systems worldwide.

The external knowledge-based architecture of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems demonstrates strong potential for legal informatics through their ability to connect Large Language Models (LLMs) to external information. The typical design of RAG systems fails to match the common law system because they focus on semantic matching instead of following the legal principles of *stare decisis* and court organization and authority strength. The paper develops a conceptual framework for Precedent-Aware RAG (PA-RAG) which aims to connect these two systems. The system includes two main components: a precedent-aware retriever that uses jurisdictional authority and temporal recency and citation network centrality to rank cases and a legal-reasoning generator that creates structured outputs which can be verified. The research establishes a complete system design and develops specific evaluation criteria for legal applications to direct future system development. The paper evaluates the moral concerns surrounding these systems before presenting a plan for their deployment and testing process to create dependable AI-based legal research tools.

This article considers how courts supervise negotiated agreements in criminal proceedings, looking at five different jurisdictions: the United States, England and Wales, France, Germany, and Poland. Although every system makes use of such agreements, they have developed in very different ways and the role assigned to the trial judge is far from uniform. What appears as a common minimum is the duty to check that the plea is voluntary and lawful, yet the depth of this review varies greatly. In some countries the judge’s role is reduced almost to a formality, while in others it is linked directly to the search for truth and the proportionality of the sentence. The paper also points to the relationship between the first-instance court’s control and the scope of appellate review, as well as to the risks that follow when judicial oversight gives way to prosecutorial dominance. The overall conclusion is that the more frequently consensual mechanisms are used, the more important it becomes to keep the court in its role as a genuine safeguard of fairness rather than a mere approver of bargains.

This paper discusses the different aspects of the fiduciary obligation with specific emphasis on the position of Sudan. The historical aspects that connect the fiduciary obligation with Sudan and the Sudanese legal system are explored to build up a realistic scheme of proposals for the future The fiduciary obligation originated in equity under the old English legal system. Originally, there were two separate streams of courts in England which were, common law courts and equity courts. This continued until the two systems of courts were merged by the Judicature Act 1873. The main function of equity courts was to do justice to cases where the rigid rules (writs of actions) of common law fail to do so. In Sudan we have a history of the formula of Justice, Equity, and Good Conscience, brought to our courts by the British with the purpose of filling up the gaps in the law at that time. It was aimed at encouraging judges to think of the best approach to decide cases when no clear legal rule can be found to cover the particular situation. On this basis, the concept of the fiduciary obligation as a product of equity, has a solid historical foundation in the Sudanese legal system. The analysis will provide clear evidence of the relevance of fiduciary concept to Sudanese law[1]. We will discuss the origin of the concept, its definition, scope and the constituent duties it embraces[2]. Full understanding shall be the cornerstone in causing the fiduciary concept to be applied in a conscious and intended way by the Sudanese courts, and cause Sudanese writers to give it more attention. We will arrive at certain suggestions and recommendations that will rely on our legal heritage and previous practices and explain how they can be enhanced and employed to further support the application of the fiduciary obligation in Sudan. [1] We will follow the historical background of the Sudanese jurisprudence in the fiduciary law, to help us build on that to provide realistic proposals for the future. [2] The fiduciary obligation is a broad concept that embodies a number of subordinate duties, reference to the fiduciary obligation is reference to the concept or principle, whereas reference to the fiduciary obligations or fiduciary duties refers to the group of subordinate duties.

Purpose: Education is losing its ground as authority disappears from the teacher-student relationship, which begins with a personal encounter. This study aimed to clarify the necessity of authority for students to move beyond egocentrism and form relationships with others. Methods: To examine the importance of rules and the source of authority, primarily based on Durkheim’s Moral Education, the study aimed to demonstrate how the teacher’s role in this process is intrinsically linked to authority and to propose a unifying center for teacher cooperation. Results: Durkheim argued that rules possess an authority that enables moral development, which he referred to as moral authority oriented toward social ideals. To manifest the authority of rules, he demanded certain qualities of teachers. However, if these qualities are required only of individual teachers, the current issue of teacher authority is at risk of being confined to a personal dimension. Therefore, this study aimed to expand the rules currently practiced by individual teachers in their classrooms into common school rules, thereby establishing a focal point for all teachers to act in solidarity at the school level. Conclusion: The collaborative practice of teachers in demonstrating the authority of common rules, being impartial and oriented towards a moral life, is expected to serve as a moment for students to spontaneously develop a sense of respect.

Opinions are usually inadmissible as evidence in a trial. However, for hundreds of years, our Anglo-American common law jurisprudence has admitted expert opinion testimony on matters that are beyond the understanding or knowledge of the average lay person on a jury. There are two predicates for admissibility of opinion testimony. First, it must be relevant to the issues in the trial and, second, the opinion must be reliable, i.e., it must come from someone who is knowledgeable in the field in which the opinion is being expressed and must be scientifically valid.

Abstract Freedom of association in Australia is legally protected and regulated in Australia principally by the common law and by statute, and only in an elliptical way by the constitution. In practice, Australians enjoy high levels of associative freedom due to cultural norms and historical traditions that undergird respect for freedom of association in social, economic and political life. This article outlines how Australian common law affirms the right to free association as a background liberty, illustrating its application across several domains. The article then discusses the limited protection to freedom of association accorded by the national constitution through the constitutional right to freedom of religion (s 116) and the implied freedom of political communication. Three case studies that illustrate the operation and importance of those protections are then closely examined. Finally, the article summarises the limited statutory protections provided by human rights charters enacted in three subnational jurisdictions in Australia, juxtaposing these against national and state laws that regulate and constrain associational rights.

This study examines the relationship between Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) scores and labor costs per employee (LCE) in firms operating under different legal traditions, specifically comparing civil law (France) and common law (United Kingdom) countries. Utilizing data from the Orbis database for the period 2020–2022, the study employs random-effects estimations with robust standard errors. Results indicate that while the relationship between ESG and LCE is not significant in common law, it is positively significant in civil law. Results are robust to alternative ESG measures, such as the social pillar score (SOCP) estimations methods and samples. The findings suggest that the legal tradition moderates the ESG-LCE relationship, with stronger positive effects observed in civil law countries. The study highlights the importance of legal frameworks in shaping the economic impacts of ESG initiatives on labor costs. While ESG concerns may result in higher LCE, and thus increased employee compensation, implementing appropriate regulations to protect workers’ rights can foster a more effective ESG-LCE relationship than relying solely on market-based regulatory systems driven by stakeholder influence.

Abstract To investigate the liquefaction pattern of undisturbed loess during seismic activity, a vibration table model has been developed to mimic the seismic response of loess slopes. The research object of this experiment is large-sized undisturbed loess, and four undisturbed loess samples with various moisture contents and slope shapes were set up. Meanwhile, pore water pressure sensors and acceleration sensors are installed in the soil to monitor the response of various measuring points under earthquake action. The results showed that in terms of pore water pressure response, the pore water pressure time history curves of each sample showed a highly consistent trend, and the coefficient of variation of data from different measurement points was less than 8%, indicating that the sensor monitoring system was stable and reliable. The pore water pressure ratio of all samples at a depth of 100 mm exceeded the liquefaction critical value of 0.7, verifying the common law that shallow loess was prone to liquefaction. Sample 4 (high moisture content+steep slope) had a pore water pressure ratio of 0.82 ± 0.03 at a depth of 370 mm, while Sample 1 (low moisture content+no slope) had only 0.23 ± 0.04 at a depth of 450 mm, reflecting the quantitative influence of moisture content and slope on liquefaction degree. The peak acceleration of all samples was lower than the input of 3.8 m s −2 , and the attenuation law with depth was consistent, indicating that the mechanical mechanism of soil liquefaction leading to loss of bearing capacity was accurately reflected in the experiment. In the linkage verification of triaxial test and vibration table test, the peak pore water pressure ratio of samples 2 and 4 reached 0.7 at the liquid limit water content, which was consistent with the result of complete liquefaction above the liquid limit. The liquefaction degree of undisturbed loess is directly proportional to the moisture content of the loess soil and the slope gradient. Additionally, it demonstrates that the vibration table test can effectively simulate and analyze the liquefaction behavior of loess under earthquake action, providing important theoretical basis for seismic design and liquefaction disaster prevention in loess areas.