Competition law enforcement under informational asymmetry

China-EU Law Journal - Competition law enforcement, whether by public officials, private parties and consumers or the courts, has to resolve informational and resource asymmetries. Current EU...     

2001年环境和自然资源法学研究的回顾与展望

一、学术研究概况 2001年我国环境资源法学研究取得丰硕的成果,研究的规模和水平有很大提高,研究的领域进一步拓展,标志着这一新的法学分枝学科正在日趋走向成熟. 2001年初党和国家将环境资源保护提到治国富民安天下的新的战略高度,以可持续发展为核心的新环境观日益深入人心,推动着我国环境资源法学研究迅猛发展.本年度环境资源法学学术研究的特点是:第一,研究的领域进一步拓展,环境法学体系更加成熟.以往环境法学主要限于环境保护(污染防治)和自然资源保护,2001年全国环境资源法学研讨会重点研究了国土资源法问题,基本界定了环境保护、自然资源保护和国土资源保护三位一体的环境法学体系.     

2001年劳动法学和社会保障法学研究的回顾与展望

2001年劳动法学和社会保障法学的研究无论在深度上还是在广度上都有所发展,呈现出以下几个特点:一是在基础理论的研究和构建上,由于这门学科相对于其他法学学科而言的新兴性,学者们不断地为其寻找定位,突破既有的法律观念和概念,表现出极大的理论勇气和创新精神;二是对具体制度的研究日益深入和细微;三是紧密结合社会实际,运用研究的理论去解决一系列实际问题.     

经济法的公法性--以马克思的市民社会与政治国家的二元理论为视角

马克思认为,市民社会既是指人类社会的一个特定的发展时期,又是指与“政治国家”相对应的私人活动领域,其中主要是私人的物质交往关系。在资本主义以前的社会中,政治国家与市民社会在很大程度上是重合的。二者的分离则是资本主义市场经济发展的内在要求,随着生产力的发展,政治国家终将统一于市民社会。经济法的产生是市民社会与政治国家的融合在法律上的一种反映,经济法是规范国家权力干预市民社会经济生活的基本法,表现出很强的公法性。     

市场监管法属于经济法抑或属于行政法

市场监管法以市场监管关系为调整对象则属于行政法范畴,要使其能够真正发挥应有的作用,则必须以竞争关系为调整对象,并以有关国家机关为辅助机关,以司法救济途径为主的方式重新构建之。     

The law commission and judicial law reform*

This article explores ways in which mooting can provide high school students with insight into life as a law student. In gaining high school students’ insights on their early exposure to a legal research skills environment involving oral argumentation exercises, the authors argue that law schools can incorporate experiential learning pedagogies into student recruitment efforts to ensure that both law school and prospective student are better prepared for each other during the delivery and study of law at university level.     

Transnational law as a framework for law clinics

Jindal Global Law Review - As the law becomes increasingly globalised and online education is increasingly emphasised, clinical legal education presents new opportunities for transnational...     

Employment law

This article attempts to trace the history of the award of ‘vindicatory’ damages under Commonwealth Caribbean constitutions, to determine, first, why the courts were hesitant to grant damages for breach of constitutional rights; second, the circumstances and the principles that informed the decision of the courts to accept that an award of damages was an acceptable form of redress under Commonwealth Caribbean constitutions; third, the manner in which these principles have evolved over the past decades in Commonwealth Caribbean human rights jurisprudence; and fourth, examine the principles that underlie the award of the recently‐coined, ‘vindicatory damages’ for infringements of the Constitution.