The gap between law student career aspirations and employment opportunities

Most law students in the UK embark upon their degrees hoping to become solicitors or barristers and yet the current legal landscape is in a state of flux. Students are incurring significant costs to try and break into an increasingly competitive market and are concerned that they do not have the skills and experience that many employers expect. With this in mind, Plymouth Law School tracked the aspirations and destinations of its LLB students and graduates over a number of years, exploring factors that encouraged or inhibited them along the path to their careers. This article evaluates the data from our students and considers its relevance to the employability issues highlighted by the LETR.     

侵权法立法模式:全面的一般条款+全面列举

一、一般条款模式     

私法自治原则的缺失——以前苏联时期民事立法为考察背景

前苏联时期，私法自治原则基于特定的理论基础，于民事立法中出现了制度性缺失，进而影响了当时民事立法基本制度的面貌。这一特定时期发生的这一法律现象，对于丰富私法自治原则的理解提供了一个极具理论意义的解读标本，并对我国的民法现代化具有启示作用。     

The stages of cybercrime investigations: Bridging the gap between technology examination and law enforcement investigation

Cybercrime investigation can be argued as still in its infancy. The technical investigation practices and procedures of global law enforcement are also still evolving in response to the growing threat of the cybercriminal. This has led to considerable debate surrounding the adequacy of current technical investigation models, examination tools and the subsequent capability of law enforcement to tackle cybercrime. To bridge the gap between low-level technology recovery and digital forensic examination, and to overcome the many technical challenges now faced by law enforcement; this paper presents an extended cybercrime investigation model capable of guiding the investigative practices of the broader law enforcement community. The Stages of Cybercrime Investigations discussed throughout this paper, demonstrate the logical steps and primary considerations vital to investigating cyber related crime and criminality. The model is intended to provide both technical and non-technical investigative resources, covering mainstream law enforcement, partner agencies and specialist technical services, with a formal and common structure when investigating the complex technical nature of cybercrime. Finally, the model is further aimed at providing cybercrime investigators with a means to consolidate understanding, share knowledge and communicate the resulting outcomes as an investigation moves through each relevant stage.     

The trust in Spanish and Italian private international law: Part I

Civil Law jurisdictions' recognition of trusts depends on theindividual conflict of law rules of each jurisdiction. The HagueConvention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Trusts intendsto bring a degree of certainty into how a foreign trust is received.However, the matter is complicated, in particular, as to thestatus granted in each jurisdiction to the convention. Thisarticle, based on a paper presented at the convention on CatalanCivil Law, ‘Los patrimonios fiduciarios y el trust’,held in Tarragona on 20 and 21 October 2005, examines the positionof trusts under the conflict of law rules in Italy and in Spainand the impact made on the recognition of trusts by the HagueConvention. This article appears in two parts; in this firstpart the position in Italy is examined and the second part concludeswith the position in Spain.     

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.     

How to build European private law: an economic analysis of the lawmaking and harmonization dimensions in European private law

In the process of building a European Private Law, the lawmaking and harmonization dimensions??the modes of harmonization and even more, the scope and reach of the harmonizing effect of the European rules- appear as crucial issues. We show how the harmonization strategy is as important a question as whether we should have European Private Law at all. We present an economic discussion of the different modes of harmonizing Private Law in the abstract, and how they are likely to differently affect outcomes. We also present in informal terms a simple economic model of how to build optimal harmonized rules and standards in a setting of pre-existing separate and diverse national ones, and we systematically explore how the different harmonization regimes (maximum harmonization, minimum harmonization, and pure co-existence of harmonized and national standards) affect the outcomes of the harmonization process.     

Why fairness cannot be automated: Bridging the gap between EU non-discrimination law and AI

In recent years a substantial literature has emerged concerning bias, discrimination, and fairness in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. Connecting this work to existing legal non-discrimination frameworks is essential to create tools and methods that are practically useful across divergent legal regimes. While much work has been undertaken from an American legal perspective, comparatively little has mapped the effects and requirements of EU law. This Article addresses this critical gap between legal, technical, and organisational notions of algorithmic fairness. Through analysis of EU non-discrimination law and jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and national courts, we identify a critical incompatibility between European notions of discrimination and existing work on algorithmic and automated fairness. A clear gap exists between statistical measures of fairness as embedded in myriad fairness toolkits and governance mechanisms and the context-sensitive, often intuitive and ambiguous discrimination metrics and evidential requirements used by the ECJ; we refer to this approach as “contextual equality.”This Article makes three contributions. First, we review the evidential requirements to bring a claim under EU non-discrimination law. Due to the disparate nature of algorithmic and human discrimination, the EU's current requirements are too contextual, reliant on intuition, and open to judicial interpretation to be automated. Many of the concepts fundamental to bringing a claim, such as the composition of the disadvantaged and advantaged group, the severity and type of harm suffered, and requirements for the relevance and admissibility of evidence, require normative or political choices to be made by the judiciary on a case-by-case basis. We show that automating fairness or non-discrimination in Europe may be impossible because the law, by design, does not provide a static or homogenous framework suited to testing for discrimination in AI systems.Second, we show how the legal protection offered by non-discrimination law is challenged when AI, not humans, discriminate. Humans discriminate due to negative attitudes (e.g. stereotypes, prejudice) and unintentional biases (e.g. organisational practices or internalised stereotypes) which can act as a signal to victims that discrimination has occurred. Equivalent signalling mechanisms and agency do not exist in algorithmic systems. Compared to traditional forms of discrimination, automated discrimination is more abstract and unintuitive, subtle, intangible, and difficult to detect. The increasing use of algorithms disrupts traditional legal remedies and procedures for detection, investigation, prevention, and correction of discrimination which have predominantly relied upon intuition. Consistent assessment procedures that define a common standard for statistical evidence to detect and assess prima facie automated discrimination are urgently needed to support judges, regulators, system controllers and developers, and claimants.Finally, we examine how existing work on fairness in machine learning lines up with procedures for assessing cases under EU non-discrimination law. A ‘gold standard’ for assessment of prima facie discrimination has been advanced by the European Court of Justice but not yet translated into standard assessment procedures for automated discrimination. We propose ‘conditional demographic disparity’ (CDD) as a standard baseline statistical measurement that aligns with the Court's ‘gold standard’. Establishing a standard set of statistical evidence for automated discrimination cases can help ensure consistent procedures for assessment, but not judicial interpretation, of cases involving AI and automated systems. Through this proposal for procedural regularity in the identification and assessment of automated discrimination, we clarify how to build considerations of fairness into automated systems as far as possible while still respecting and enabling the contextual approach to judicial interpretation practiced under EU non-discrimination law.     

The European airline industry: law and economics of low cost carriers

This article offers an analysis of the European airline industry in order to understand the new dynamics of the competitive field. The liberalization process did not lead the entrance of competitors similar to incumbents, but a new organizational model has been developed, the one of low cost carriers. The incumbents’ reaction to the liberalization process coupled with the entrance of low cost companies into the sector are hence considered. Two theories are analysed: the contestable markets theory, to understand the theoretical vision that has influenced the liberalization process, and the core theory, a modern approach to the concept of destructive competition that, according to some authors, is a recurring problem in the sector. While numerous barriers to entry still exist, the paper examines how the organizational model of low cost companies has helped new entrants to overtake these obstacles. By the same token, the application of the core theory does not seem to justify strategic alliances taking place in these years. The competitive framework is definitely clearer if we analyse sector changes in a different way, from the point of view of low cost companies considered as new market actors.     

Robots,standards and the law: Rivalries between private standards and public policymaking for robot governance

This article explains the complex intertwinement between public and private regulators in the case of robot technology. Public policymaking ensures broad multi-stakeholder protected scope, but its abstractness often fails in intelligibility and applicability. Private standards, on the contrary, are more concrete and applicable, but most of the times they are voluntary and reflect industry interests. The ‘better regulation’ approach of the EU may increase the use of evidence to inform policy and lawmaking, and the involvement of different stakeholders. Current hard-lawmaking instruments do not appear to take advantage of the knowledge produced by standard-based regulations, virtually wasting their potential benefits. This fact affects the legal certainty with regards to a fast-paced changing environment like robotics. In this paper, we investigate the challenges of overlapping public/private regulatory initiatives that govern robot technologies in general, and in the concrete of healthcare robot technologies. We wonder until what extent robotics should be governed only by standards. We also reflect on how public policymaking could increase their technical understanding of robot technology to devise an applicable and comprehensive framework for this technology. In this respect, we propose different ways to integrate the technical know-how into policymaking (e.g., collecting the data/knowledge generated from the impact assessments in shared data repositories, and using it for evidence-based policies) and to strengthen the legitimacy of standards.     

The social cost of adoption agencies

The use of adoption agencies to place adoptable children is compared with a market. The lost consumer surplus to potential adopting parents amounts to between $45 million and $1.7 billion per year. In addition, evidence is presented from follow-up studies of adoptions to indicate that social workers do a poorer job of matching parents with children than the market would. Finally, recent trends are surveyed to show that the market for parenthood rights is continuing to evolve despite various barriers to its development.This is the day they give babies away With a half a pound of tea You open the lid, and out pops the kid With a ten-year guarantee. (Margaret Berry)     

税收法治的现实差距与对策

改革开放以来,我国的税收法治建设有了很大的进步。由于税收主体观念错误、税法体系不完善、税收执法不严等主要因素存在,与税收法治的目标有很大差距。文章从完善立法、加强执法和法律监督等几方面提出了具体的对策,以推进我国税收法治建设。     

现代性与私法文化精神论纲

现代性运动展现了差异性、多样性、自由自主性的私人生活领域和活动空间 ,促进了私法文化精神和法治信仰的形成 ;而现代性的当代困境、危机和重建倾向 ,则促进了私法文化精神的当代转型和反思超越。在现代性追求和重建的复杂背景下推进中国法治进程 ,就要积极培育具有时代诉求的私法文化精神 ,以促进私法秩序和法治国家的建立。     

Autonomy and private ordering in contract law

This essay reviews Michael J. Trebilcock's book,The Limits of Freedom of Contract (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), examining crucial and controversial social issues within the rigorous framework of the law and economics of contract. The idea that private markets are the primary institutions for the allocation of limited resources is central to any private ordering model of contract law. Yet such a premise leaves a number of fundamental questions unanswered. Trebilcock is critical of the insufficiency and ambiguity of current contract theory in addressing fundamental legal issues relating to the limits of freedom of contract. Pushing the frontiers of current legal theory, Trebilcock revisits the slippery notion of freedom of contract and tests the actual reach of economic analysis in providing a coherent answer to compelling social questions. The author pursues his ambitious task by examining the conclusions reached by competing paradigms of analysis. In spite of his declared trust in the economic approach to law, Trebilcock pays close attention to alternative analytical traditions, comparing the conclusions of various intellectual perspectives with those suggested by an economic framework of private ordering. The book objectively examines strengths and weaknesses of competing views, affording the reader a balanced position from which to conclude for herself, by illustrating the practical implications of the various approaches. In a number of instances, Trebilcock shows how different theoretical premises may indeed be conducive to similar institutional outcomes.Associate Professor of Law, George Mason University. The support of the Sarah Scaife Foundation and of the John M. Olin Foundation is gratefully acknowledged, as are the helpful comments of Jonathan C. Harris and Charles K. Rowley. Extensive remarks received from Michael J. Trebilcock prior to publication allowed me to remedy earlier omissions.