“It is hard to fight an enemy who has outposts in your head.”
The way society reacts to and treats mentally ill individuals who commit criminal acts has been an example of the coexistence of two vastly differing approaches throughout human history. On the one side, we often find spurn, repugnance, even disgust. The most significant problem, however, is the general – multiple – stigmatisation that is related to insanity and criminal behaviour going hand in hand. On the other side, we can observe the shaping of another attitude to treat mental illness more like actual sickness than criminality. (Dósa, 1995, p. 327.)
In the field of contracts, the Romanian private law system underlines the presence of the principle of good faith in each phase of a contract, starting with the negotiation and ending with the performance of the obligations. Moreover, the Civil Code and doctrine also talk about good faith in the context of termination of the contract, when the parties have to choose between legal remedies. When it comes to breaking this public order obligation doctrine brings into question the existence of abuse of right.
1. Context. The social dimension of a state represents, unquestionably, the foundation of its very existence. As a subject, cause and mobile of the act of governing, society justifies the creation, implementation, maintenance and constant evolution of one of the largest known socio-political institutional structures – the state. As such, society consists of ‘a unitary and complex system of human interactions’ (Muraru & Tănăsescu, 2011, p. 1 sqq), which ‘can exist, develop and that can exercise its power only in and by the means of organised structures’ (ibid).
The present article aims to single out the legal implications of the situation in which a person decides to acquire a guard dog in order to protect himself/herself from possible threats. Staying alive is our basic daily task. Therefore, not surprisingly, humans resort to a multitude of mechanisms for protection in order to feel safe. The argumentation will be built by analysing a particular case that raises legal issues in the field of both criminal and civil liabilities in the Romanian legal system.
The aim of this article is to analyze one of the absolute grounds for refusal of trademark protection, specifically public policy and accepted principles of morality in connection with illegal activities. The article is focused on decision-making practice of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (further as “EUIPO” only) with an insight into decision-making practice of Industrial Property Office in the Czech Republic.
Children migration has become an important phenomenon in recent years. In the European Union, 110,000 children have sought asylum between January and July 2015, among which 12,000 were unaccompanied (UNICEF, 2015, p.1). While there is a lack of exact data about migrant children in detention, the Global Detention Project reported in 2015 that “child migrants are routinely detained in many countries” (2015, p.18). The practice of detaining migrant children, in addition to having negative consequences on children’s health and development, also violates several children’s rights and state obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Greece has ratified the Convention, and has committed itself to give protection to children, with respect for the principle of the best interest of the child. However, Greece does not comply with the standards on the protection of migrant children. This article will focus on the situation of unaccompanied migrant children in Greece, and in particular on the issues of detention and guardianship.
Imagine a situation where a seller failed to supply goods under a contract. The buyer applies for interim injunction on goods to prevent their further resale. The buyer wins, but fails to recover judicial-related costs, since according to the applicable national law, each party shall bear its own costs. The buyer wants to recover these costs and later files a claim for damages which resulted from the breach of the contract by the seller - a failure to supply the goods. Would the buyer be able to recover its legal costs incurred in the injunction proceedings as damages in subsequent proceedings?
The interface of human rights and extradition is widely experienced as a domain of ‘tension’ between protective and cooperative functions of international legal assistance. Protective functions are evidently most important when risk of life or torture of a requested person is at stake (Silvis, 2014).
The main aim of this analysis is to clarify the content of the term lex mercatoria, what was its way of development and to briefly describe the general attitude of the courts (as authorities of law enforcement) towards it. It is important to know the history and the reason for the creation of lex mercatoria, the later codification, and also its place in the legal world. Furthermore, it is essential to analyse the purpose of the International Court of Arbitration, which plays a significant role in the use of merchant law nowadays and, at last, to discover how important the merchant law is today.
What is Corporate Social Responsibility?
As the field of human rights develops, wideness and increases in importance, it influences and also it intertwines with the corporations and business world. Therefore, the concept of corporate social responsibility has developed. We shall start by defining this term.
It is common knowledge that in our national field regarding cyberspace, the harmonisation of laws concerning The Domain Name System represents a serious issue, as there is a lack of effectiveness in what concerns the legislation ought to protect intellectual property.
A slight glimpse back to the origins of the internet depicts a common use of the internet – communication. Although the purpose was different (easy communication as a way to protect from Russian threats), the main reason represents the need of facilitating sending and receiving information.
As a source of unlimited fascination due to its topics, forensic science has a significant place in the legal system of every country in the world and an irreplaceable influence upon criminal investigations. This study is designed according to a twin approach in view: a scientific approach towards the characteristics of handwriting on the one hand, and a practical view centred on the graphic elements – which are subjects to graphoscopic examination – on the other. The main points of interest to be discussed in the following article are: the difference between graphology and graphoscopy; the scientific basis of identifying an individual based on his handwriting; the handwriting’s individuality, relative stability, reactivity and naturalness, along with its general and special features; and also the means of falsification.