Necessity Of Laws Research Articles

Myśl ekonomiczna kalwinizmu

The aim of the paper is to present the economic thoughts of John Calvin and his followers, referring to current issues, such as money lending, usury, or work. The latter, according to the famous thesis of Max Weber, received spiritual value by acting as a bridge between God's will and daily life. The hypothesis of this article differs somewhat from this conviction, assuming that the main economic elements of Calvinist thought have been the consequence of the release of temporal realities from the influence of the direct action of God, according to the protestant theology of the radical separation of nature and grace. Initiated by Protestantism, the dichotomy of nature and grace seems to have important consequences for economic thought. The salvific dimension of human fate remained in the hands of God, he depends entirely on its favour in connection with the dogma of predestination. In the earthly life, a human being was treated as a part of nature, his survival depended on skill and determination. in the struggle with nature, devoid of the grace of God, ruled by the law of necessity. Survival and a better life depended primarily on human labour and effort. The flourishing of economic life has resulted not only from the ethical role of work, but also from the fact that it was no longer inhibited by religious restrictions. Thus, modern man was born, more and more aware of his subjectivity, subordinating nature to himself building the human world in place of the natural world. Building a modern society and economy is part of the Protestant ethos of mastering nature.

Monetarni kredibilitet kao društvena vrednost u savremenom monetarnom pravu i pravu centralnih banaka

The subject matter of analysis in this paper is the concept of monetary credibility and its important place in the normative framework of contemporary monetary law. The emphasis on the importance of credibility in public monetary management has been present as a basic axiological subordinate to the norms of monetary law since it was established as an independent and independent branch of the legal order. The content and direction of the monetary activities of the central bank, as the basic subject of monetary law, were mixed over time and adapted to new circumstances, which resulted in the expansion of the regulatory competences of the central bank, the emergence of new theories about the legal custody of money and establishing limits of legal responsibility in the work of monetary agents. Notably, the meaning of credibility has remained the same, being the final monetary legal thought of each epoch, the ideal and the ultimate purpose of this branch of law with all its institutes, principles and categories. Contemporary monetary law, which has sui generis legal sources, proves to be extremely flexible even in today's unstable social conditions and suitable for transformation into the law of necessity. In extraordinary circumstances, when it is required in a value context, it does not make credibility the primordial value of public management of every institution. Thus, the central bank remains in the central position.

The “Law of Necessity”

AbstractIn June 1835, the Brazilian parliament promulgated a stringent law which punished enslaved persons convicted of assassinating their masters with capital punishment. Called the “law of necessity,” the regulation targeted the leaders of slave rebellions and established the death penalty as punishment against slave resistance. Research on the enforcement of the law demonstrated that while the regulation increased public hangings of the enslaved, overall fewer convict slaves were executed because of the law than had their sentences commuted to galé perpétua or a lifetime of penal servitude in public works. Analyzing slave petitions to commute death penalty sentences to penal servitude, this article intervenes in the debates on punishing the enslaved which connects labor history with the history of punishment. The research probes convicts’ understanding of the construction of Brazilian legal culture while analyzing the tensions between slave-owners and imperial authorities on punishing the enslaved.

A World without Echoes

A World without Echoes

Robert Alexy and the Dual Nature of Law

AbstractRobert Alexy's claim that law of necessity has a dual nature raises many interesting philosophical questions. In this article, I consider some of these questions, such as what the meaning of the correctness thesis is, whether Alexy's discourse theory supports this thesis, and whether the thesis is defensible; whether Alexy's argument from anarchy and civil war supports the claim that law of necessity has a real dimension; and what the implications are of the use of moral arguments, such as the argument from injustice, for the status of Alexy's inquiry.

The Long Parliament and the Law of Necessity in Seventeenth-Century England*

Abstract The ability to claim an eminent right over property was central to the parliamentary war effort. Relying on a narrative of necessity that jurists in both England and in western Europe had increasingly used since the end of the sixteenth century, MPs gave the English political public a narrative parallel to that of a beggar in extreme duress: in order for it to survive, the property rights of English subjects needed to give way. Scholars have noted the Long parliament's use of necessity in the past in order to disassociate the causes of the Civil War from a ‘rule of law’ ideology or to make a claim that Parliament made a novel political theory of emergency. Yet the Long parliament was not abandoning English law nor was it generating a novel theory of emergency. Instead, it was relying on legal concepts that jurists and Crown officials commonly used to advance the power of the state. This law of necessity was controversial, however, and the Long parliament's continued use of it generated conflict even as it also enabled MPs to seize control over England's armed forces.

The Law And Economics Of Cannibalism: The Limits Of Valuation Criteria And Benefit-Cost Analysis

All general rules for behavior or valuation and for law itself break down under some circumstances. The law struggles with this sort of issue in the law of necessity, in assigning rights, in valuation, in considering burdens of proof with incomplete information, and in developing common law. This is no less true of cost benefit analysis, (CBA) or benefit-cost analysis (BCA), which depend on the law for definitions of rights. Economics and economists have long been extensively faulted for their treatment of values and valuation. These criticisms usually suggest no alternatives, though voting is sometimes mentioned. The point of this paper is that there is no perfect criterion for valuation but that some are better than others, and that a sophisticated benefit-cost analysis is often the best or is at least a reasonable or possible approach even under conditions not particularly favorable to its use.

Law of Necessity: Introduction and Comparative Study of Islamic and Western Thoughts=قانون ضرورت :اسلامی اور مغربی نظریات کا تعارف اورمقارنہ

Law of Necessity: Introduction and Comparative Study of Islamic and Western Thoughts=قانون ضرورت :اسلامی اور مغربی نظریات کا تعارف اورمقارنہ

Pobreza y propiedad. ¿Cara y cruz de la misma moneda? Una lectura desde el republicanismo kantiano

El objetivo del trabajo es mostrar que la pobreza es, para Kant, la contracara de una distribución social de la propiedad adquirida incompatible con la igual libertad de todos según leyes universales. El problema de la pobreza no es –dejó dicho Kant– un tema de beneficencia o de deberes éticos laxos de cada cual. Tampoco es un asunto de un derecho de necesidad que habilitara al pobre a robar cuando sus necesidades elementales no están satisfechas. Es un problema estructural en la constitución de un estado jurídico, una grieta fatal en el diseño de sus Instituciones públicas incapaces de configurar una vida social acorde con la reciprocidad en la libertad externa de todos.

Constitutionalizing Canadian private international law – 25 years since Morguard

Because of its structuring function, private international law tends to be given a status distinct from the ordinary rules of domestic law. In a federal system, private international law of necessity implicates some aspects of the constitution. In a series of cases beginning in 1990 the Supreme Court of Canada has engaged in a striking reorientation of Canadian private international law, premised on a newly articulated relationship between private international law and the Canadian constitutional system. This constitutional dimension has been coupled with an enhanced notion of comity. The new dynamic has meant that changes in private international law that were initially prompted by constitutional considerations have gone further than the constitutional doctrines alone would demand. This paper traces these developments and uses them to show the challenges that the Supreme Court of Canada has faced since 1990 in constructing a relationship between Canada’s constitutional arrangements and its private international law. The court has fashioned the constitutional doctrines as drivers of Canadian private international law but its own recent jurisprudence shows difficulties in managing that relationship. The piece concludes with lessons to be learned from the experience of the last 25 years.

Glosa do wyroku Sądu Sprawiedliwości Ontario w sprawie R. v. Wagner z dnia 12.06.2014 (R. v. Wagner, 2015 ONCJ 66)

The paper deals with the judgment of the Ontario Court of Justice of 12 June 2014 in the case R. v. Wagner 2015 ONCJ 66. The reviewed judgment refers to legal frameworks of anti-abortion protests in the Canadian legal order. The Court found pro-life activist Mary Wagner guilty of breach of probation orders – which prohibited her from being on the premises of any abortion provider in Ontario – and of mischief interfering with private property. She gained entry to abortion clinic in Toronto and sought to intercede with various clinic patients by offering them roses and pro-life brochures in an effort to have them reconsider their interest in having an abortion. The Court held that neither law of self-defence (exactly defence of others) nor the law of necessity could insulate Wagner’s conduct from criminal liability. The Court also rejected the contention that a foetus is a “human being” under the law. It said that ascribing personhood to a foetus in law is a fundamentally normative task which falls outside the concerns of scientific classification. This strong normativism position led the Court to the conclusion that Wagner’s protest in the clinic was not an attempt to protect the “everyone’s” right to life under s. 7 of the Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms. Finally the Court assumed that neither Principle of the “Rule of Law” nor principle of the “Supremacy of God” – both expressed in the preamble to the Charter – convalidated the defendant’s acts. In the author’s view the reviewed judgment is consistent with the letter of the law in the sense of legal positivism. It is debatable whether the given judgment is righteousness, depending on which theory of justice is chosen to rely on. However the court’s opinion belies the requirements of equity. Imprisonment for peaceful pro-life protest is serious infringement of core values of liberal and democratic state.

The Great Recession and the New Frontiers of International Investment Law: The Economics of Early Warning Models and the Law of Necessity

The Great Recession has prompted unparalleled economic research on the causes and handling of crises. It is then important for international investment law to catch up with the new conceptual developments. This article is an attempt in this direction. Its first part presents a description of one of the main tools to avoid economic collapses— early warning models (EWMs)—which have received increasing attention by the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Fed. This part also presents the debate among economists about the meaningfulness of EWMs. The second part shows how international investment law should respond to this debate and proceed with an assessment of the role that EWMs may have in the interpretation of emergency clauses in BITs and the customary rule of necessity. In particular, this part deals with the question of what happens in international legal terms when a State, which relies on EWMs to adopt measures aimed at preventing a crisis, adversely affects foreign investors. The section also discusses the level of deference that investor/State tribunals may accord to States relying on EWMs when taking economic preventive action and illustrates how international arbitration tribunals should deal with debates on the quality of the given EWMs. “Everything is fragmented and fluid and unstable and hopeful and dangerous. We have insights and connections and blank spaces and questions,” said the Egyptian writer Ahdaf Soueif. 1 While she refers to the Arab Spring, her words also apply to its contemporary opposite: the Western winter—the Great Recession, the current

Non Performance of Treaty Obligations in Cases of Necessity – From ‘Necessity Knows no Law’ via the ‘Law(s) of Necessity’ to Interfaces Between Different ‘Laws of Necessity’

Non Performance of Treaty Obligations in Cases of Necessity – From ‘Necessity Knows no Law’ via the ‘Law(s) of Necessity’ to Interfaces Between Different ‘Laws of Necessity’

Non Performance of Treaty Obligations in Cases of Necessity – From ‘Necessity Knows no Law’ via the ‘Law(s) of Necessity’ to Interfaces Between Different ‘Laws of Necessity’

Non Performance of Treaty Obligations in Cases of Necessity – From ‘Necessity Knows no Law’ via the ‘Law(s) of Necessity’ to Interfaces Between Different ‘Laws of Necessity’

RE-CONSTRUCTING A PUBLIC HERITAGE BUILDING CASE STUDY: WESTERN WING OF LAHORE HIGH COURT BUILDING, LAHORE

Violating the Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance 1985, Lahore High Court (LHC) authorities demolished an enlisted, protected public building i.e. Western Wing (W.W.) of Lahore High Court (LHC) Lahore in year 2004. The argument for demolition of 90 years old colonial building was based on “The Law of Necessity”1 . To fulfill the immense need of accommodation of eight-number court rooms, LHC Administrative Authorities decided to raze the existing single storey heritage building of W.W. and construct a double storey structure. Architects, Archaeologists and Civil Society representatives launched an aggressive agitation to stop the demolition but authority proclaimed, “LHC building is not a shrine that can not be demolished or re-constructed” (Daily Times, 2004a). Lahorites approached Supreme Court who passed stay order against demolition and directed LHC authorities to re-construct the razed building, following the ditto architectural features in its true spirit and using the similar construction materials. Supreme Court further desired to appoint an experienced Resident Architect for such specialty job of intricate nature. This study reveals the integrated-coordinated efforts of administrative authorities of LHC2 , technical and professional input of Communication & Works Department3 , concern of architectural professional bodies4 and supervisory role of Resident Architect working under government conventional system of execution, having expertise in re-creating the historic building of Colonial period having heritage value. Study also presents a comparison between conventional methodology of execution of a public heritage building as practiced by Communication and Works (C & W) Department, Government of Punjab (GoP), and the integrated-coordinated design approach where Resident Architect and Client Department had played a vital role while working with the Contractor and Engineers of C & W Department. Key Words: Colonial Building, Heritage, Lahore, Architecture, Archaeology, Restoration, Public Building, History, Lahore High Court, Brick Masonry.

On Necessity as a Defence to Crime: Possibilities, Problems and the Limits of Justification and Excuse

The article reviews recent developments in England in the law of necessity as a defence to crime and calls for its further extension. It argues that the defence of necessity presents the criminal law with difficult questions of competing values and the ordering of harms. English law has taken a nuanced position on the respective roles of the courts and the legislature in the ordering of harms, although the development of the law has been pragmatic rather than coherently theorised. The law has granted necessity some scope as an exculpatory principle in the law of general defences, but it has also respected the primacy of the legislature as the legitimate arbiter of many of the competitions of value that necessity throws up. The recognition of necessity has not been in the form of a single unified defence of that name. Rather it has taken the form of a number of defences, based on a principle of necessity, but with different nomenclature and different rationales. This approach to necessity is defended as right in terms of principle and policy. Any further development of necessity as a general defence should be restricted to two contexts, namely those of emergencies, and of conflicts of duty, where a danger of death or serious injury is present.

Murder and the Defence of Necessity

This honours paper was supervised by Dr. Gregor Urbas. This article discusses the criminal law defence of necessity, as applied to a murder charge in Australian jurisdictions. In the article, I argue that necessity should be available as a complete statutory defence to murder in all Australian jurisdictions, if certain conditions are met. To reach this conclusion, I first analyse the state of the law of necessity across the Australian and UK jurisdictions, give reasons for the scope of the defence extending to murder cases (based on utilitarian and deontological theories) and finally provide a statutory framework for a uniform defence to a murder charge. The article makes use of real-life and hypothetical examples in order to demonstrate the practical effect of necessity applying to a murder charge in different situations.

Uexküllian Planmässigkeit

In strict opposition to the prevailing positivist conception of nature as senseless and deprived of meaning Jakob von Uexküll claimed that a certain planmässigkeit was operative in nature. This idea however might be taken to mean that organic evolution is not itself a creative process but a gradual, if majestic, unfolding of Nature's own master plan. Such an idea would threaten to restore determinism in the center of biological theory, and this would seriously contradict the vision of biosemiotics shared by most of its proponents. It lies at the heart of biosemiotics and of Peircean cosmological philosophy that indeterminacy is primary, that “habit taking” or interpretation are real processes in the world, and therefore that belief in the law of necessity is unfounded. It is suggested that Uexküllian planmässigkeit is in fact reconcilable with a modern non-deterministic understanding. In a certain sense the Umwelten of animals have indeed developed in accordance to a natural planmässigkeit, but this is a plan that incessantly traps life in certain strategic choices and in the same time diversifies the dimensionality of options for dealing with these choices, i. e. “the adjacent possible” in the terms of Stuart Kauffman.

Transactional justice and reciprocity: towards a cohesive theory of liability

The traditional view of tort liability in the USA is based on the assumption that fault generally turns on whether the tortfeasor's actions were 'reasonable'. This understanding has resulted in a legal landscape where the exceptions defy the rule, creating anomalous areas of law that operate according to completely different rationales. This paper suggests that this is because the decisions that have created this landscape are motivated by less articulated rationales. An unarticulated adherence to the concept of transactional justice explains why anomalous doctrines such as 'strict liability' and the 'law of necessity' operate the way they do. But this adherence is tempered by equal awareness of the importance of reciprocal risks – the background risks of participating in society. This limiting doctrine of reciprocity explains the existence of negligence theory, and why some cases fall under a negligence standard while others fall under strict liability. The result is a more cohesive theory of liability, which allows for the intersection of two mutually limiting principles. This theory unites the various conflicting areas of tort law in US jurisprudence in a way that is conceptually logical, so that the 'exceptions' are in fact predictable outcomes of the overarching pattern.

American liberalism and jewish response

American Jewry contributed notably to restoring "republican vir tue" to American liberalism. It did so by giving a strong emphasis to the communal dimension of public policy which it drew from its own distinctive political culture. That Jewish wrinkle ultimately became the heart of the controversy which marks the development of that much misunderstood mind-set. In the final decades of the 19th century American liberalism had tipped to its libertarian extreme making plain that on the ideological level the three elements of the venerated slogan of the French revolution, on which liberalism is based, are incompatible. Allowed full rein 'liberty" will make a shambles of "equality," and erode "fraternity" as well. The American forefathers were aware that an "excess" of liberty posed a threat to the polity.2 They optimistically assumed that "republican virtue," such as practiced by the citizen of the Greek city state, combined with a dose of what John Adams called the "principles of political architecture," would hold bucca neering individualism in check. There is ample evidence from before the Civil War that these assumptions were unrealistic. Today they lie in ashes. One look at the inchoate graffiti on the New York City subway or at the pricing of a two-dollar screwdriver in a Lockheed defense contract tells at a glance how weak a defense "republican virtue" is against rapaciousness. The political culture of the eastern Jewish immigrants contained an antidote. Liberty, they understood, needs to be contained by the laws of necessity or else it would result in chaos and injustice. Throughout their Diaspora they were compelled to match their limited freedom with a sense of responsibility. They assigned the discharging of communal responsibility to their governors, and to the