'These boots are made for walking': why most divorce filers are women

Because of the financial and social hardship faced after divorce,most people assume that generally husbands have instigated divorcesince the introduction of no-fault divorce. Yet women file fordivorce and are often the instigators of separation, despitea deep attachment to their children and the evidence that manydivorces harm children. Furthermore, divorced women in largenumbers reveal that they are happier than they were while married.They report relief and certainty that they were right in leavingtheir marriages. This fundamental puzzle suggests that the incentivesto divorce require a reexamination, and that the forces affectingthe net benefits from marriage may be quite complicated, andperhaps asymmetric between men and women. This paper considerswomen's filing as rational behavior, based on spouses' relativepower in the marriage, their opportunities following divorce,and their anticipation of custody.     

The Role of French Environmental Associations in Civil Liability for Environmental Harm: Courtesy of Erika

Last January, the Tribunal Correctionnel de Paris, in its decisionconcerning the Erika oil spill, clearly recognised the rightof environmental associations to claim compensation for damagedone to the environment per se. Taking the judgment as a startingpoint, this article gives a brief insight into the French regimeof civil liability for environmental harm, with a special focuson the role, as provided in the regime and further developedin the case-law, of French environmental associations. The latterare formally recognised, under certain conditions, as "guardians"of the collective interest to environmental protection. As aresult, they are entitled to bring civil party petitions beforecriminal courts in case of -largely defined- "environmentalcrimes". These procedural rights have been broadly interpretedby (criminal, as well as civil) courts and effectively usedby associations to ensure that the "polluter pays" and thatcivil damages reflect, to the extent possible, the reality ofenvironmental harm, while serving the interests of general prevention.     

UNITED STATES COURTS AND THE OPTIMAL DETERRENCE OF INTERNATIONAL CARTELS: A WELFARIST PERSPECTIVE ON EMPAGRAN

E. Hoffmann–La Roche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. concerned aprivate antitrust suit for damages against a global vitaminscartel. The central issue in the litigation was whether foreignplaintiffs injured by the cartel's conduct abroad could bringsuit in U.S. court, an issue that was ultimately resolved inthe negative. We take a welfarist perspective on this issueand inquire whether optimal deterrence requires U.S. courtsto take subject matter jurisdiction under U.S. law for claimssuch as those in Empagran. Our analysis considers, in particular,the arguments of various economist amici in favor of jurisdictionand arguments of the U.S. and foreign government amici againstjurisdiction. We explain why the issue is difficult to resolve,and identify several economic concerns that the amici donot address, which may counsel against jurisdiction. We alsoanalyze the legal standard enunciated by the Supreme Court andapplied on remand by the D.C. Circuit, and we argue that itsfocus on "independent" harms and "proximate" causation is problematicand does not provide an adequate economic foundation for resolvingthe underlying legal issues.     

DOES ECONOMICS PROVIDE A RELIABLE GUIDE TO REGULATING COMMODITY BUNDLING BY FIRMS? A SURVEY OF THE ECONOMIC LITERATURE

This article surveys the voluminous economic literature on commoditybundling. While bundling has been widely studied, the vast majorityof the literature has focused on theoretical treatments of bundlingthat demonstrate a wide range of reasons why firms might engagein bundling. These papers generally contain restrictive assumptions,including assumptions regarding the existence of monopoly insome markets, and the nature of rivalry in others. The modelscontained in these papers also generally suppress the more obviousand ubiquitous reasons firms may use bundling. Moreover, thesemodels have not been subject to robustness checks, nor havetheir assumptions been tested empirically. This review of theeconomic literature generally confirms the US Solicitor General'sview in 3M v. LePage's regarding the underdeveloped state ofthe economics literature and its position that the US SupremeCourt should defer promulgation of antitrust standards for bundling.While the literature has demonstrated the possibility that bundlingcan generate anticompetitive harm, it does not provide a reliableway to gauge whether the potential for harm would outweigh anydemonstrable benefits from the practice. As a result, the widespreadapplication of the antitrust laws to bundling by firms can generatesignificant error costs by erroneously condemning or deterringefficient business practices. In the future, economists shouldseek to expand their understanding of both the anticompetitiveand procompetitive reasons firms engage in bundling. This willentail studying the reasons why bundling is adopted by firmswithout market power, relaxing the assumption of monopoly intheoretical models, and generating testable hypotheses and thedata to test them.     

Who controls the Naomi Campbell information flow? A practical analysis of the law of privacy

Legal context. The House of Lords held that the medical privacyof the glamorous supermodel Naomi Campbell was violated by publicationof details of her drug addiction treatment and a paparazzi picture.English law is developing under the influence of Article 8 (theright of privacy) and Article 10 (the right of freedom of expression)of the European Convention of Human Rights. The court explainedhow the action for breach of confidence protects privacy. So,who controls the Naomi Campbell information flow? Key points. Primarily, the courts control the flow of privateinformation. They do so through the cause of action of breachof confidence and remedies. In deciding liability, the courtsshould ask whether the benefit of publication is proportionateto the harm done by the invasion of privacy. To answer the question,they must balance the public interest in the right of privacyagainst the public interest in the right of freedom of expression.They may settle on a Reynolds type test by considering a numberof non-exhaustive factors. The article examines seven suggestedfactors and the remedies which can be deployed by the courts.Judgments from the English courts and the European Court ofHuman Rights are considered, including Campbell v MGN (HL),Douglas v Hello! (CA), McKennitt v Ash (HC), Peck v UK (ECtHR),Édition Plon v France (ECtHR), and Von Hannover v Germany(ECtHR). Practical significance. There are an increasing number of privacyclaims against the media. The article includes a checklist ofseven factors to help determine where the balance lies betweenprivacy and freedom of expression.     

... and then 25 years later

What started off in 1982 as a quiet family trust, 25 years laterhas turned out to be rather a cause célèbre. Atleast it might become so if the full report of a recent caseis as disturbing as the brief report which appeared in the Timeson 12 February 2007. Inadvertent distress and expense all roundwas caused where it appears that the settlors of a family trust,in 1982, purported to resign as trustees and appointed the InvestmentBank of Ireland (IOM) Ltd and an individual to be, interestingly,as the Times describes each as the sole trustees. Interestinglyboth were resident overseas. Presumably, there were tax planningmotives behind making the trustees resident outside the UK taxjurisdiction. It all went wrong and ended up with five beneficiaries and,the two more recently     

THE IMPACTC OF DIVORCE ON FAMILIES

Australian research on the impact of separation and divorce on children and their families has consistently shown that although separation is a stressful event in the lives of families, the long-term prospects for these families is encouraging. A number of issues arising from the research presented in this article warrant closer consideration by decision makers, court administrators, and professionals dealing with disputing families. First, programs aimed at reducing conflict and assisting families to deal with the emotional impact of separation need to be given priority. Second, there is sufficient indication to suggest that poverty as a result of separation and divorce has a debilitating effect on women and children. Third, in dealing with disputes over custody and access, care needs to be taken to respect the needs of individual children. Finally, high conflict in a family postseparation should be a warning to pay particular attention to the potential harm of applying joint custody and frequent access presumptions.     

THE CUSTOMER IS SOMETIMES RIGHT: THE ROLE OF CUSTOMER VIEWS IN MERGER INVESTIGATIONS

Antitrust enforcement officials and practitioners generallyagree that customers should have a prominent role in the mergerreview process. The question of the appropriate level of reliancethat competition authorities and courts should give to customertestimony has been the subject of considerable debate sincethe Arch Coal and Oracle decisions. This paper contains a comprehensivediscussion of the use of customer testimony throughout the U.S.merger review process, from the initial merger notificationfiling to injunction proceedings in federal court. We discussthe benefits from and problems with the use of customer testimony,including how these problems have led to litigation losses forthe U.S. antitrust authorities. What is the appropriate roleof customer testimony and when is it most probative? We contendthat customers can provide investigators and judges with informationregarding several relevant issues in an acquisition, includingindustry structure, geographic and product demand substitution,and acceptance of potential market entrants. In contrast, customerswill have considerably less information relevant to the likelihoodof entry, the extent of any merger-specific efficiencies, andthe validity of a failing firm defense. They will almost neverbe qualified to offer legal conclusions, such as the propermarket definition or likely competitive effects of a proposedmerger. We conclude that courts have generally remained consistentin their reliance on customer testimony, including in the ArchCoal and Oracle cases, and that customer testimony, despiteits limitations, should and will continue to be important ateach stage of the merger review process.     

A NATIONAL SURVEY OF US POLICE ON PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF IDENTIFICATION LINEUPS

A great deal of research has been aimed at identifying the factors that produce errors in eyewitness identification. However, most of this work has been conducted in laboratory environments using undergraduates and naive lay persons as research participants. Little information is available on what police officers do in the course of their identification activities. The present research investigated the procedures that police officers report employing when constructing and administering eyewitness identification lineups. We developed a survey that addresses a number of these issues, including experience, sources of lineup foils, lineup formation and display, lineup fairness evaluation, presence of suspect's attorney, witness instructions, historical records, and legal challenges. Surveys were sent to 500 US police jurisdictions; 220 were returned. Several survey items showed results consistent with previous laboratory research, however police officers reported using some procedures that are different from those established as most effective in the research literature. This paper summarizes the results of our survey and discusses the implications for future research and forensic procedures.     

The no-conflict rule: the acceptance of traditional equitable values?

Boardman v Phipps is a leading authority on the no-conflictrule. The House of Lords maintained the strict rule that historicallyequity has imposed on a fiduciary. This article explores howthe dissenting judgment of Lord Upjohn in Boardman v Phippshas been preferred by the lower courts and why the courts haveadopted such a position. This has fuelled a more general debateas to whether the no-conflict rule should be harsh or more flexible.Recent cases including Bhullar v Bhullar are discussed to illustratethe present approach of the courts to the recurring issues surroundingpossible applications of the no-conflict rule.     

Introduction

We are pleased to present the inaugural issue of the Journalof Competition Law and Economics (JCLE), which the Oxford UniversityPress will henceforth publish quarterly. The aim of the JCLEis to publish cutting-edge academic     

NEXT STEPS IN THE EVOLUTION OF ANTITRUST LAW: WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE ROBERTS COURT

Under the leadership of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.,the Supreme Court has demonstrated a willingness to cast asidethe Court's prior antitrust decisions. The qualified per serule applicable to tying surely will not survive much longer,but what else might be in store is more speculative. This essayidentifies four decisions relating to competitor collaborationin which the Court's prior application of the per se rule doesnot comport with its modern decisions. In two of the cases,the conduct likely would be found lawful today; while in theother two, the conduct most likely still would be condemnedbut only after an abbreviated application of the rule of reason.This essay also identifies three legal doctrines ready for retirement.They are the absolute requirement of market delineation as apredicate for merger analysis, the outmoded approach to marketdelineation of Brown Shoe, and the unhelpful formulation ofthe monopolization offense in Grinnell.     

COMMENTS ON NETWORK NEUTRALITY

The term "price discrimination" has been used to vilify itspractitioners since the term's inception in economics. Pricediscrimination is considered evil because discrimination isconsidered, in most contexts, as evil. If instead we describedthis common phenomenon as price distinction instead of pricediscrimination, the general field of thought on the matter would,most likely, be extremely different. If a producer engages in"distinguishing" prices instead of discriminating prices, theworld would be a more rational place, because economic discriminationis so often socially beneficial. The network neutrality argumentis no different. The debate essentially addresses the issueof limiting a network provider's ability to engage in pricedistinction before the fact. The model of a toll road presents an acceptable framework foranalyzing network neutrality. It has been used frequently toanalogize the Internet     

Michelin II: A Per Se Rule Against Rebates by Dominant Companies?

In its Michelin II judgment of September 2003, the CFI foundthat Michelin breached Article 82 EC by setting up a systemof rebates that could potentially induce loyalty and excludeits competitors. This paper comments extensively on MichelinII and other cases, with a focus on what sort of competitionpolicy is desirable as regards rebates by dominant companies.Contrary to Michelin II, pricing policies of dominant companieswhich are not linear and not strictly reflecting economies ofscale are not necessarily anticompetitive and may indeed havesignificant pro-competitive effects. Furthermore, a requirementthat a rebate scheme be "economically justified" is very difficultto apply in practice, and the Court should not have put theburden of proof for the justification of quantitative rebatesupon the dominant company. Most preoccupying is the Court'srejection of the effect criterion when deciding on the legalityof a rebate: Such an approach, which differs markedly from USand UK law as well as from the OECD report on fidelity discounts,will generally result in a disproportionate per se-prohibitionof any pricing behaviour and in economic inefficiencies. A fairerand clearer approach could therefore distinguish between rebatesthat are per se allowed and other rebates that ought to be prohibitedonly if they have effects on the market.     

Screening for suicide risk factors in prison inmates: Evaluating the efficiency of the Depression,Hopelessness and Suicide Screening Form (DHS)

The Depression, Hopelessness and Suicide Screening Form (DHS; Mills & Kroner, 2002 ) is a recently developed self‐report instrument to aid in screening inmates in the titled areas. Research has shown the DHS to have good internal consistency, factor structure and construct validity. The present study extends the previous validation research by comparing the disclosure of suicide risk factors on the DHS with both interview‐based and file review information. In addition, the DHS scores were used to predict psychological distress. The results indicate that despite the paper‐and‐pencil self‐report approach of the DHS it is comparably efficient in gathering suicide risk factors to other methods. In addition, the predictive accuracy of the DHS in identifying inmates experiencing psychological distress was confirmed. The current study has implications for the method of collection of suicide screening information. The discussion centres on the potential of self‐report in screening for suicide and self‐harm indicators in inmate populations.     

A good introduction to publishing

Hugh Jones and Christopher Benson's book entitled, simply, PublishingLaw seeks to provide a useful and straightforward guide to copyrightlaw in the field of publishing. The accolades on the back statethat it is ‘an excellent, accessible, one-stop legal reference’and that it is ‘an invaluable resource for those practisingor studying the business of publishing’. Such praise bodeswell. The great tomes on copyright present a standard that is difficultto achieve. Laddie, Prescott & Vitoria     

INVESTIGATING THE NORMATIVE ASPECTS OF PUBLIC POLICY

This article challenges the idea that political philosophy must be of peripheral concern in the study of public policy through an exploration of the concept of harm and the debate over aggressive police patrol. This exploration begins with a brief discussion of the ways the concept of harm figures in the justification and administration of police work. It proceeds through an exposition of differing ways the concept of harm can be defined, the normative overtones of these varying definitions, and some of their policy ramifications with regard to police work. Finally, the way conceptual variation figures in policy debate is explored in the context of the debate over aggressive police patrol—the policy of maximizing the surveillance and criminal interception aspects of police activity as a patrol strategy.     

染色混合精斑涂片DNA检验方法的研究

建立了染色混合精斑涂片DNA的提取方法,通过两步扩增的技术与垂直聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳及银染色法,成功检测了3个STR位点.结果显示,所有染色涂片DNA分型均与对照血样一致,苏木素-伊红(HE)染色比酸性复红-美蓝(Baecchi)染色对DNA的降解作用要小;涂片灵敏度检验可达到少于10个精子,且室温保存一年以内的涂片其灵敏度光显著差异.该方法简单、快速、可靠,为染色混合精斑涂片的PCR分析提供了新方法.     

Trade mark use in transit: EU-phony or cacophony?

Legal context The present article discusses the opinion of Advocate-GeneralJacobs in Case C-405/05 Class International BV v Unilever NVand others, according to which trade mark owners cannot opposethe entry into the European Union of grey market non-Communitygoods placed in external transit, on the grounds of Article5(1) of the Trade Mark Directive, or any equivalent provision,as such entry does not constitute trade mark use. Key points We examine the consistency of this approach withprior case law of the European Court of Justice, namely in theCommission v France, Rioglass, The Polo/Lauren and Rolex casesand draw a parallelism with Council Regulation (EC) 1383/2003. Practical significance We conclude that trade mark owners shouldbe allowed to prohibit the placing in transit of goods whichwould infringe an intellectual property right under the lawof the transit country, unless the owner or consignor of thelitigious goods can undeniably prove that the goods are notdestined for the internal market. Stop press. At the end of the article the authors provide abrief analysis of the European Court of Justice's decision of18th October 2005 in this case.     

WEAPON EFFECTS AND INDIVIDUAL INTENT TO DO HARM: INFLUENCES ON THE ESCALATION OF VIOLENCE*

In order to assess the roles of weapons and offender intentions in the outcomes of potentially violent events, we analyze more than 2,000 incidents described by offenders. We advance the study of weapons effects through a within‐person analysis that lets us control for all time‐stable characteristics of the offenders. Thus, we address the concern that relationships between type of weapon and incident outcome may be spurious because individuals with a greater propensity to do harm are more likely to use guns. Findings indicate that weapons have independent effects that differ across the stages of an event.