Freedom and choice in constitutional law

The constitutional rights of children, the mentally ill, and other legally incompetent persons have been the subject of much litigation in the past twenty years. In this Article, Professor Garvey develops a general theory to explain the different ways in which persons of diminished capacity can be said to enjoy constitutional protections. He first notes that, of the various constitutional provisions, only one kind - freedom, which protect the right to make choices - pose serious difficulties when applied to persons of diminished capacity. He then proposes a hierarchy of ways in which we can attribute freedoms to such persons: the laissez-faire notion that all persons (including incompetents) are to be treated identically, the instrumental idea that granting freedoms to incompetents achieves extrinsic goals such as training, and the surrogate notion that persons who cannot make choices for themselves should be able to have those closest to them choose on their behalf. Professor Garvey concludes that, when these options fail and the state takes an incompetent person under its control, the state owes to the incompetent the full package of duties owed by other guardians to those under their control, including treatment in the case of the mentally ill or education in the case of children.     

Multiple choice examining in law

This article will review the place of assessment in Higher Education. In investigating alleged over‐assessment in higher education, it is argued that an excess of one form of assessment over another limits student learning. How this imbalance has a detrimental effect on learning is identified, before solutions for the individual lecturer and institutions are considered. The author draws on existing literature, but also contributes his own experience and his research in the UK and USA.     

Party autonomy in the choice of law under Indian and Australian private international law: some reciprocal lessons

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic will affect the performance of several contracts and is likely to increase the number of disputes before the courts. In agreements with a foreign element, the adjudication of the rights and liabilities will depend on the applicable law. Most legal systems have embraced the doctrine of party autonomy and, accordingly, permit the parties to expressly select the law to govern the disputes that arise from international contracts. India and Australia are no exception to this trend. In general, the courts in both the commonwealth countries have reported having been influenced by judicial practices of one another to develop their own law. Despite their common law roots, the interpretations attached to the doctrine of party autonomy in the choice of law have varied in some respects in these countries. The paper analyses the judicial trends on the subject and demonstrates the role that party autonomy will play in resolving international disputes where the performance has been affected by the eventualities such as the COVID-19 pandemic in India and Australia. The paper delves into the manner in which the courts in India and Australia may offer reciprocal lessons to each another to revolutionise to interpret the doctrine of party autonomy in the choice of law.     

提单法律选择条款探微

提单中的首要条款、地区条款和法律适用条款均涉及法律选择问题,只有法律选择条款才具有选择提单准据法的功能.认定提单条款是否属于法律选择条款,主要应当依据当事人的真实意思表示,而不是该条款的名称.提单法律选择条款在性质上是以冲突法为内容的合同,该合同本身是否合法,由法院地的冲突法决定;该合同的成立和效力,受该合同本身的准据法支配.     

Revisiting the choice model of Ponzi and Pyramid schemes: analysis of case law

This exploratory study operationalizes the variables comprising the choice model of white collar crime through analyzing cases decided by federal courts, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Cases were extracted from the LEXIS-NEXIS, WESTLAW, and the NERA Economic Consulting databases and categorized according to the indicators of the choice model: size of pool of criminally predisposed, supply of lure, prevailing beliefs about credibility of external oversight, internal oversight and self-restraint, and supply of criminal opportunities. The findings show that unequal access to information among the investors and misuse of trust and affinity relationships affected the size of the pool of criminally tempted individuals. Supply of lure was affected through advances in modern technology and promises of wealth and material success at low costs and risks. Prevailing beliefs about the credibility of external oversight and internal corporate regulatory controls were affected by the efficiency and effectiveness of enforcement authorities. Variables described by the choice model of white collar crime can be operationalized through analysis of existing case law.     

Technology,property, and law

Between 1975 and 1986 forty-eight states passed laws specifically criminalizing unauthorized access to computer-based information. Thirty of these states passed their computer crime laws between 1982 and 1985. This flurry of legislative activity occurred in a climate of concern for the need to stem what was characterized as a wave of computer crime. The data presented here, however, indicate that these laws did not result in any corresponding wave of prosecutions of computer criminals. This suggests that social forces other than an instrumental need for a mechanism to prosecute computer criminals played a role in the passage of computer crime laws. Specifically, we argue that the passage of computer crime laws resulted from the need to incorporate a new form of value within the establish framework of property rights, and a desire to preserve established relationships between power and knowledge that were threatened by the emergence of computer technology. We conclude by suggesting that the study of law-making is enhanced by examining the structural bases for the motives of legislators and advocates of legal change, in addition to the motives themselves.     

论《行政强制法（草案）》的价值取向

在现代公民社会里,在所有行政权力中,最具侵犯性、对公民人权和法人权利威胁最大的就是行政强制权。就国内的现状,过去和现在最不受约束的就是行政强制权的滥用。《行政强制法(草案)》的出台,首次以立法的形式规范政府行政强制行为,彰显了“法治”性,“契约”性和“人本”性的价值取向。     

Challenging arbitral awards: A comparative study of Chinese law, british law and UNCITRAL model law

Support and supervision of a court ensure the integrity of the arbitral process and protect the public interest. However, to prevent the confidence of the arbitral system from being damaged, the judicial control should not be too strict. The support and supervision of a court can be seen in many aspects, among which is to challenge an award. Under the Chinese arbitration law, an award made by a foreign arbitration agency is regarded as a foreign award, challenge of which involves resisting recognition and enforcement in accordance with the relevant provisions of the international treaties concluded or acceded to by the People’s Republic of China or on the principle of reciprocity. Accordingly, an award made by a Chinese arbitration agency is regarded as a domestic award, challenge of which includes setting aside and resisting enforcement. As to the grounds and procedures for challenging a domestic award, including foreign-related awards and non-foreign-related awards, some Chinese provisions are either obscure or contradictory. There may be room for the Chinese system to be modernized. The Model Law and the English Arbitration Act of 1996 may be used for its reference.     

The 2007 Interpretation of the Supreme Court of China on contractual choice of law: Comments and analysis

On July 23, 2007, the Supreme Court of China issued a new judicial interpretation on contractual conflicts. By this Interpretation, the Supreme Court of China publicized contractual conflicts rules. Although a new legal system has been established in resolving conflict of laws in accord with the Law on the Application of Law in Foreign-Related Civil Relations in China (effective on April 1, 2011), there are not many detailed rules concerned on contractual choice of law in this law. As far as contractual conflicts are concerned, the new rules just re-confirm the principles embedded in the 2007 Interpretation. In China contractual conflict disputes still have to largely resort to the 2007 Interpretation.