Environmental crime and problem-solving courts

Environmental harms are by their nature complex and as such give rise to formal legal responses that range from simple regulatory intervention to multi-faceted court order. The purpose of this paper is to explore the emergence of environmental courts and the development of judicial and tribunal expertise in this specific area. A wide range of sanctions are now available and being actively applied by such bodies. Moreover, in many instances, the philosophical approach adopted by these courts is that of problem-solving. The combination of specialist expertise and innovative methods of intervention are progressively revolutionising judicial practice in regards to contemporary environmental issues.     

Litigating life and death.

In cases involving the "right to die," courts are faced with the agonizing task of developing legal standards governing termination of an incompetent patient's medical treatment. In this Article, Professor Rhoden criticizes the two dominant approaches courts have developed--the "subjective" and "objective" tests--and proposes that these standards be abandoned for a legal presumption in favor of family decisionmaking. She maintains that the "subjective" test, which requires the family to provide clear proof that termination of treatment is what the incompetent would have chosen, is often unworkable because a patient's character traits, and even her prior statements about medical treatment, seldom rise to the evidentiary level that courts purport to require. Similarly, she argues that the "objective" test, which requires the family to prove that the burdens of the patient's life, measured in terms of pain and suffering, clearly and markedly outweight its benefits, dehumanizes patients by suggesting that only their present, physical sensations count. Professor Rhoden suggests that the subjective and objective tests are not nearly as distinct as courts have made them. She argues that the rigidity of these legal standards reflects courts' acceptance of the medical profession's presumption in favor of continued treatment, a presumption that places a heavy burden on families seeking to terminate treatment. Drawing on the special qualifications of families as decisionmakers in such cases, Professor Rhoden proposes that courts recognize a presumptive right of families to exercise discretion over treatment decisions. Such a standard would recognize that, although doctors and others can readily prove that terminating the treatment of a patient who can still enjoy life is wrong, it is very hard for families to meet the current standards, which essentially require them to prove that termination is right.     

Gacaca Courts: Between Fantasy and Reality

Faced with an overflowing caseload and imperatives of nationalreconciliation, Rwandan authorities have established a systemof justice, meted out through gacaca courts under the legalframework created by organic laws. The following contributionanalyses this framework, within the context of national andinternational legal systems, and pinpoints the shortcomingsof the proposed form of justice. These include legal issuessuch as the problem of retroactivity, as well as the definitionof crimes and concerns over due process and the right to a fairtrial for defendants. Practical and material obstacles arisein implementing the organic laws, alongside broader implicationsowing to the traditional nature of such courts and possibleinterference by political authorities. In this respect, thegacaca courts may be victims of their own ambitions, by seekingto respond to judicial, societal and philosophical concernsalike.     

保证保险合同若干法律问题研究

保证保险一般作为分期付款消费的一种履约担保,由于当前没有调整此类合同关系的相关法律规定,审判实践中做法各异,相同类型的案件常常在不同法院中出现不同的判决结果。对此,有必要对保证保险合同的性质、法律适用、合同的独立性和各合同主体的诉讼地位等实践中争议较大的法律问题进行比较分析,以期为当前法院审理车贷案件提供理论上的参考。     

论我国立法和司法对法定外在标准的过度依赖——以我国医疗损害责任鉴定与诉讼实践为例

我国法中存在着在侵权法问题的判定上过度依赖"法律法规"、"行业标准"和"诊疗规范"的倾向。这些"外在"标准替代了法官对法律"内在"规则的审视和适用。行业标准替代了法律标准。比如,在医疗过失判定标准上,法官过度依赖"诊疗规范",忽视了基本法律标准——注意义务违反说和"合理医生"标准——的探寻和适用。我国法应纠正此种现象,注意对法律规则,比如医疗过失和因果关系判定规则的细心构建,以给法官具体指导。"法律法规"、"行业标准"和"诊疗规范"在侵权法中是判定过失的重要标准,但不是终局性和根本性标准。     

School liability for student injury from school violence: comparison between South Korea and the USA

This paper examines school liability for school violence-related student injury in South Korea and the US. The study found that the US courts considered only violence-related behaviors of the perpetrator when judging whether violence can be foreseen; thus drug abuse or verbal abuse by the perpetrator were not considered as a part of his/her violent history. On the other hand, the Korean courts considered perpetrators’ nonviolent behavior, such as low academic achievement or negative attitudes toward academic work, as indicators of violent history. Regarding the extent of school liability, while in Korea, schools were not held responsible for injuries to non-school-related persons caused by their students’ violent acts in public, in the US, the court required schools to take legal responsibility for such cases happening during field trips. These findings help to reconsider school liability for school violence and generate suggestions for more reasonable and universal legal standards.     

A Typological Reading of Prevailing Legal Theories

A classic debate in the history of philosophy is that between rationalists and empiricists concerning the “true” source of human knowledge. In legal philosophy this debate has been reflected in the classic opposition between natural law and legal positivist perspectives. Even the currently predominant inclusivist perspectives on the nature of law, such as inclusive legal positivism and inclusive legal non‐positivism, are not immune to such a dichotomy. In this paper I attempt to present an understanding of specific cognitive characteristics of prevailing legal theories from the perspective of the theory of psychological types as developed by Carl G. Jung.     

An economic analysis of the use of citations in the law

This paper examines the use of citations analysis as an empiricaltool for understanding aspects of the legal system and for improvingthe performance of the system. Emphasis is laid on the use ofsuch analysis as a means to evaluate courts and judges (andtherefore as a judicial-management tool), to test hypothesesabout judicial behavior, and to evaluate and improve legal scholarship.It is argued that economic models, particularly of reputationand of human capital, can frame and guide the use of citationsanalysis in law.     

Under the microscope: legal challenges to fingerprints and DNA as methods of forensic identification1

Suspects in legal cases can be identified by an ever‐growing list of novel methods. The most common techniques currently used include latent print and DNA analysis. Although standard fingerprinting entered the courtroom over a century ago, the admissibility of fingerprint evidence has undergone a period of intense scrutiny in the USA in recent years. In contrast, most challenges to DNA analysis as a science came during its inception in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Current challenges to fingerprint evidence attempt to discredit the science behind the theory whereas challenges to DNA evidence often bring into question the competency of the analyst. In either case, the lessons learned in various court systems give guidance for those implementing the newer emerging biometric identification technologies such as facial recognition systems, retinal scans and the like. The first section of this article deals with fingerprint analysis and recent challenges to fingerprint admissibility in US courts. The second section discusses the evolution of DNA analysis and relevant cases. The final section gives recommendations for emerging biometric technologies to follow to satisfy the standards set forth by the courts.     

Improving justice and mental health systems interactions

Over the last three decades, theorists and practitioners in the field of mental health law have adhered to adoctrinal analysis paradigm characterized by an emphasis on legal doctrine, rational analysis of self-evident, albeit abstract legal principles, and law reform. Acknowledging that the paradigm has been highly successful in facilitating major reform of mental health law, the thesis of this article is that its value for understanding and improving justice and mental health systems interactions is largely exhausted. It urges a “paradigm shift” to an approach that emphasizes the interrelated steps, tasks, and processes in the interactions of the justice and mental healthsystems. It suggests several directions where such a shift might lead: (a) inquiry focused on such organizational components of justice and mental health interactions as court clinics; (b) the development of a meaningful statistical portrait of the number and composition of cases that impact both the justice and mental health systems; (c) a better understanding of the missions, goals, objectives, and administrative structures of the components in the justice and mental health systems interactions; (d) a greater emphasis on the work of trial courts, as opposed to appeals courts; and (e) the development of a new information architecture for the field of mental health law.     

Rules, Principles and Ombudsmen: Norwich and Peterborough Building Society v The Financial Ombudsman Service

The judgment in Norwich and Peterborough Building Society v the Financial Ombudsman Service ¹ provides good evidence of the drawbacks of rule based adjudication, and the need for ombudsmen to be able to rely on principles of fairness. Further, it demonstrates, to those who associate ombudsmen and general standards of fairness with arbitrary and subjective decisions, ² how such determinations are constructed through, and constrained by, the legal context of codes, rights, etc in which the assessment is made. The decision also demonstrates an attempt to create a division of labour when courts and ombudsmen operate alongside each other, with the courts having a monopoly on the interpretation of legal rules, and ombudsmen being left to determine, with only minimal restrictions, a principled basis for the assessment of fairness.     

Psychosocial concepts in juvenile law

This study was designed to clarify the types of information about juveniles and their families that are relevant for three types of juvenile court decisions: (a) the pretrial detention of juveniles; (b) their transfer for trial in criminal courts: and (c) disposition decisions after delinquency adjudication. Predominant legal standards for these decisions are described, information relevance for the decisions is defined, and why past studies have failed to clarify the information needs of juvenile court decision makers is explained. Results of a study involving a national sample of juvenile court personnel include an empirically derived domain of psychosocial and behavioral characteristics of juveniles and their families relevant for courts' interpretations of controlling legal standards; factor analysis of the domain, describing dimensions of the domain of information about juveniles and families; and an examination of the relation of these information categories to each legal standard controlling the decision areas in question. The interpretation of results may facilitate decision making by juvenile courts, evaluations by mental health professionals who assist juvenile courts, and further research by social scientists who study discretionary juvenile court decisions.This research was supported by grant No. MH-35090 from the Center for Studies of Antisocial and Violent Behavior, National Institute of Mental Health, DHHS. Portions of the study were conducted in collaboration with the National Juvenile Law Center, Inc. of St. Louis. The authors wish to acknowledge Martha Bellew-Smith, Marcia Conlin, and Robert Rust, who contributed substantially to the conduct of the study. Others who participated at various stages are Steve Bellus and Sandra Seigel     

Legal Reasoning and the Separation of Powers: A State-Level Analysis of Disputes Involving Federal Funds Appropriations*

This article investigates the influence of judicial decisions on state legislative oversight of federal funds. A systematic analysis of judicial decisions is undertaken in an effort to reveal (a) the extent to which such activity on the part of legislatures is permitted or denied by courts, and (b) the nature of legal reasoning that determines differential outcomes. The analysis reveals, among other things, that there are two divergent paths of law: one upholding the legislative prerogative to exercise the power of the purse, and the other upholding the executive function of governors to act as custodians and executors of federal funds and programs. The delegation of legislative powers to interim committees is likewise investigated.     

环境损害司法鉴定费制度的完善

环境损害司法鉴定在生态环境保护案件的审判中是关系责任认定和赔偿额度的关键证据。通过对最高人民法院发布的81件生态环境保护典型案例进行分析,结果发现司法鉴定机构收费不规范、不公开、价格虚高的现象普遍存在,高昂鉴定费已经成为当事人申请鉴定或者法院委托鉴定的难题。为破解该困境,环保部门、司法部门等相关部门应尽快从厘清鉴定费的性质入手,合理确立鉴定费负担原则,制定环境损害司法鉴定收费标准,同时建立健全环境损害司法鉴定评估资金保障机制,使环境损害鉴定评估真正成为环境保护与生态修复的助推器。     

The legal status of clinical and ethics policies, codes, and guidelines in medical practice and research

This article examines the legal status of "soft law" in the fields of medicine and medical research. Many areas of clinical practice and research involve complex and rapidly changing issues for which the law provides no guidance. Instead, guidance for physicians and researchers comes from what has often been called "soft law"--non-legislative, non-regulatory sources, such as ethics policy statements, codes, and guidelines from professional or quasi-governmental bodies. This article traces the evolution of these "soft law" instruments: how they are created, how they are adopted within the professional community, and how they become accepted by the courts. It studies the relationship between soft law instruments and the courts. It includes an examination of the approaches to judicial analysis used by the courts in theory and in practice. The authors then examine the jurisprudence to see how courts will adopt professional norms as the legal standard of care in some circumstances and not others. They consider the legal concerns and ethical issues surrounding the weight attached to professional practices and norms in law. The authors demonstrate how practices and policies that guide professional conduct may ultimately bear weight as norms recognizable and enforceable within the legal sphere.     

Revisiting the legal standards that govern requests to sterilize profoundly incompetent children: in light of the "Ashley Treatment," is a new standard appropriate?

This Note discusses the recent controversy surrounding a six-year-old girl named Ashley, whose parents chose to purposefully stunt her growth and remove her reproductive organs for nonmedical reasons. A federal investigation determined that Ashley's rights had been violated because doctors performed the procedure, now referred to as the "Ashley Treatment," without first obtaining a court order. However, the investigation did not make any conclusions regarding whether the "Ashley Treatment" could present a legally permissible treatment option in the future. After discussing the constitutional rights that the "Ashley Treatment" implicates and the current legal standards in place, this Note examines how courts have applied these legal standards to cases involving extreme requests. Drawing upon legal commentators, this Note concludes that a court could approve a request for the "Ashley Treatment" in appropriate and limited cases where the parents have presented clear and convincing evidence before a court that the benefits that the "Ashley Treatment" would provide to the child and her family outweigh the risks associated with the procedure. This Note argues that those benefits may include extrinsic considerations, but courts should remain cautious when considering such evidence and be sure that the evidence as a whole supports their conclusions.     

Achieving Timely Permanency in Child Protection Courts: The Importance of Frontloading the Court Process

Timely permanency for foster children has been an unrealized goal in our nation's juvenile courts. The goal of timely permanency is a legal mandate, it serves the needs of families, it is consistent with evolving case management standards, it is required by the Canons of Judicial Ethics, and it serves the best interests of children. Judges must take a leadership role within their courts to reduce delays in child protection courts. Through a series of changes including legislation, court rules, case management techniques, and judicial control, timely permanency for foster children can be achieved.     

Rethinking Law and State Building in Sub‐Saharan Africa

Massoud, Mark Fathi. 2013 . Law's Fragile State: Colonial, Authoritarian, and Humanitarian Legacies in Sudan . Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. Pp. x–277. ISBN: 9781107440050. Paper $34.99 This essay is a response to Mark Massoud's Law's Fragile State, and through comparative inquiry argues that highly contextualized analysis of courts is critical to gaining an understanding of judicial decision making and judicial empowerment. As Massoud demonstrates, focusing on the legal complex is a particularly worthwhile endeavor in fragile states. Although we may understand the sociology of the legal profession, we do not fully understand how professional networks, career paths, and identities truly impact the institutional pathways of the courts and the legal system as a whole.     

论可诉性是行政行为的本质属性

可诉性是指法律行为的可诉性,行政行为的可诉性是指行政主体作出的行政行为在一定条件下可诉诸法院司法审查的一种本质属性,这是判断行政行为的一个根本标准;过去,我国学界对行政行为特性的认识却忽视了这一点。可诉性是贯穿于行政行为与行政诉讼的一条红线,它使公民行政诉权的行使与法院对行政权的司法审查成为可能,具有普遍适用性。     

行政主体适用法律法规错误研究

行政主体适用法律法规错误是行政法治实践中发生的问题，《行政诉讼法》没有作出适用法律法规错误的具体规定，学界对这一问题的讨论亦存在着诸多方面的困惑。因而关于行政主体适用法律法规错误的具体范畴、考量标准等都没能形成比较合理和一致的看法。我们认为，主要有置换法律法规位置、混淆法律法规门类、误读法律法规条文、颠倒法律法规规制事项和曲解法律法规原则等错误适用。应将“适用的法律法规是否与案件事实对应、适用的法律法规是否与当事人对应、适用的法律法规是否与行政职权对应、适用的法律法规是否与行为方式对应”等标准确定下来成为行政法规范，使行政主体在适用行政法时予以注意，并能够为人民法院的司法审查提供法定标准。