Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (32) (remove)
Language
- English (32) (remove)
Keywords
- Private International Law (1)
- comity (1)
- democratic theory (1)
- equality (1)
- equivalence (1)
- forms of government (1)
- institutional design (1)
- jednakost (1)
- majority rule (1)
- međunarodno privatno pravo (1)
Institute
- Bürgerliches Recht (32) (remove)
There has been considerable movement in German licensing law for some years now. Based on the fate of the license in the case of the granting of sub-licenses and in the case of insolvency of one of the contracting parties involved, a number of court decisions have been handed down which mainly deal with the legal nature of licenses and their mode of operation.
Moreover, there is now an internationally significant development in licensing law, namely the increasing independence of patents used in standards, which have increasingly become the subject of economic considerations – and not only of the companies or inventors filing them. zur Fussnote 1 These so-called standard essential patents (SEPs) are the subject of numerous legal disputes and legislative activities and constitute a scientific discourse around the globe.
In 2015, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) created the first leading case for the EU with regard to SEPs in its highly regarded Huawei/ZTE ruling. zur Fussnote 2 Although an abundance of decisions of the courts of first instances are now available, many questions still remain unanswered since the fundamental decision of the ECJ. There is controversy both over the dogmatic classification of the FRAND declaration and the legal consequences of the declaration’s binding effect. It is particularly unclear what happens to the FRAND declaration when the SEP is transferred to a third party and whether, how and to what extent the acquirer is bound by this declaration of the transferor. In a decision that can certainly be described as bold, a Higher Regional Court has now ruled on some of these issues for the first time, thus providing further food for discussion.
What does the value of political equality imply for the institutional design of democracies? The existing normative literature highlights the importance of proportional representation and legislative majority rule, but neglects the choice of an executive format. This paper explores two potential egalitarian trade-offs in this choice. First, while presidential systems tend to achieve too little bundling of separable decision-making issues (within political parties), parliamentary systems often tend towards too much bundling (between political parties), thus establishing informal veto positions in the democratic process. This is a trade-off between the adversarial' and deliberative' aspects of equality. Second, there is a trade-off between horizontal' and vertical' equality. Neither pure presidentialism nor pure parliamentarism may be able to maximise both dimensions of equality simultaneously. The paper argues that certain hybrids between parliamentarism and presidentialism have the potential to mitigate both trade-offs. These hybrids establish power separation between the executive and legislature without allowing for popular executive elections. The argument also has potential implications for the democratisation of the European Union.
The Indian Ocean
(2017)
Theses
(2016)
Offences against the person
(2017)
Private international law (PIL) might seem disconnected from peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts. However, this perception falls short. PIL, contrary to public international law’s direct peacekeeping potential, indirectly contributes to peace by fostering mutual respect between states. The relationship between PIL and peace stems from the recognition and respect states show for each other’s legal systems. PIL operates on the principle of comity, where states acknowledge the applicability of foreign laws to resolve cases. In essence, while PIL’s impact on peace is indirect and modest, its emphasis on mutual respect and fair treatment contributes to peaceful relations between states, making it an important element in the broader context of peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts. Private international law (PIL) does not determine substantive fairness for parties but focuses on localizing cases at a meta-level of conflict-of-laws. This localization is guided by party, trade, and regulatory interests, and is rooted in neutrality and respect for other legal systems. While the principle of equivalence and neutrality remains foundational in PIL, exceptions and limitations have been established over time to address specific scenarios, ensuring a balanced approach that respects both foreign legal systems and fundamental legal principles.
On 14 December 2017, the Assembly of States Parties of the Rome Statute decided to activate the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. In doing so, it however seems to have rescinded the Kampala amendment adopted in 2010, and in particular, the need for State Parties to eventually opt out from the Court’s aggression-related jurisdiction. This reversal, while being more in line with the Rome Statute than the Kampala amendment itself, raises new (and old) and challenging legal questions which are highlighted in this article.