Dolly and Alice

The opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, In re Roslin Institute, rejecting patent claims to mammals cloned from somatic cells, was rendered about a month before the United States Supreme Court''s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International. The Alice opinion explicitly sets out the standard for determining whether an invention falls within statutory patentable subject matter. Thus one is thus left to wonder what the Roslin opinion might have looked like had it been decided only a few weeks later, after the Alice decision was published, with the benefit of the Supreme Court''s further direction on patentable subject matter. In this essay I explore whether in hindsight the Alice standard might have dictated a different outcome in Roslin, suggesting how the two-part test articulated by the Supreme Court in Alice might apply to a ‘products of nature’ analysis for cloned mammals. Drawing on that analysis, I then use the Roslin case as a vehicle to highlight certain issues with the Supreme Court''s current subject matter jurisprudence as applied to biotechnology. By juxtaposing Dolly with Alice, it becomes clear that the Supreme Court has revivified a number of dormant biotechnology patent problems in the guise of subject matter analysis.     

Argumentation and Legal Interpretation in the Criminal Decisions of the Polish Supreme Court and the German Federal Court of Justice: A Comparative View

The subject of this study are the argumentation strategies applied by the Polish and German apex courts competent in criminal matters, namely the Supreme Court and the Federal Court of Justice, respectively. The investigation encompasses a total of 200 rulings issued by the criminal panels of these bodies. Particular focus was put on examining which arguments both courts apply to solve interpretation problems, and secondly, how these courts systematize the interpretation process. Methodologically, the examination utilizes, inter alia, the principles of qualitative research, without neglecting the legal dogmatic perspective. A crucial theoretical foundation underlying this study is the distinction between formalistic and substantive legal cultures. The examination reveals that neither the Polish nor the German legal culture is purely formalistic or value-oriented. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court of Poland shows greater affinity for formalistic arguments, whereas the substantive interpretation methods are more widespread in the judicature of the German Federal Court of Justice. In particular, the Polish Court prefers the linguistic interpretation, whereas the German Court favours the purposive approach.

     

The importance of an industrial court in the interpretation of labour statutes

The paper highlights the National Industrial Court of Nigeria’s (NICN) importance over the general courts in the interpretation of labour statutes. It compares the judicial interpretation of some provisions of labour statutes by the general courts in Nigeria (represented herein by the Supreme Court of Nigeria’s interpretation of same provisions) with the interpretation of the NICN of same provisions. It argues that the NICN’s interpretation is more favourable to labour rights than that of the general courts. It makes use of the rules of judicial interpretation and Ronald Dworkin’s discussion on interpretation as a framework and adds to it by comparing the judicial interpretation of some provisions of labour statutes by the general courts with that of the NICN. It noted that the NICN’s interpretation was more purposive and promoted labour rights than that of the general courts. The Supreme Court cases used to represent the position of the general courts were those decided before exclusive jurisdiction on employment and labour matters was conferred on the NICN in 2010. Presently, even though the general courts no more have jurisdiction to hear and interpret employment and labour matters the NICN’s interpretations continues to promote labour rights.     

Use the Purpose by Which All May Benefit: The Semiotics of ‘Public Use’

This paper applies semiotic analysis to issues arising from the recent Supreme Court decision of Kelo v. City of New London [545 U.S.469] (2005). The author uses the tools of semiotics to explore the evolution of language and speech and their relationship to the terms, “private property” and “public use” as used by the Supreme Court and the general public in the years leading up to the Kelo decision. This paper will first provide an overview of the field of semiotics, describing the prevailing thought and the methods utilized by semioticians to find meaning. Second, the tools of semiotics will be applied to Supreme Court cases, beginning with Bauman v. Ross [167 U.S. 548] (1897) and continuing to Kelo v. City of New London. Utilizing these tools, the author will show how, within the span of approximately 100 years, the speech of the court has affected the language of legal discourse. The signs to which both Bauman and Kelo seek to attach meaning are found in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which provides, in relevant part, “…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”(emphasis added) (U.S. Const. Amendment 5). This dialectic activity resulted in the development of two different languages. One was used by the layperson, whereas the other was found in relevant legal/political institutions such as the US Supreme Court. This paper will focus on the fundamental change in the meaning of the sign/expression “public use.”     

The devil is in the details: How arbitration system design and training facilitate and inhibit repeat-player advantages in private and state-run arbitration hearings

This article demonstrates that arbitration system design and the training that arbitrators receive shape the extent to which repeat players gain advantages in arbitration hearings. While prior arbitration research does suggest that arbitrator training matters, this is the first article to show how it matters, as we observe actual arbitration hearings in private and state-run arbitration systems in two states. Our comparative analysis links three literatures interested in how seemingly interest-neutral institutions, like disputing forums, serve in practice to reinforce dominant norms, values, and hierarchies: (1) sociolegal studies of repeat-player advantages in disputing, (2) studies of occupational socialization in educational settings, and (3) neoinstitutional organizational sociology studies of how managerial values influence the way in which organizations construct law. We bridge these literatures by showing how arbitrator system design and the occupational socialization that arbitrators receive in private arbitration are primary mechanisms through which managerial values influence the arbitration process, ultimately providing a pathway for repeat-player advantages in hearings. Because our analysis compares two distinct arbitration systems, we identify variation in these processes and offer preliminary but tangible policy recommendations for the design and implementation of arbitration systems that best protect civil and consumer rights within arbitral forums that the Supreme Court continually upholds.     

Through the Eyes of the Abolitionists: Free Association and Anti-Slavery Expression

When the rights of a private association conflict with the rights of an individual, which have priority? A series of twentieth century free association cases from the Supreme Court of the United States have focused on this issue, but the historical roots trace back as early as the mid-nineteenth century. This historical case study explores the concept of free association in the context of the American abolitionist movement. Specifically, it focuses on abolitionist leader Charles Osborn, whose struggle with the Society of Friends provides one example of how a private threat to expressive association played out prior to the Civil War. Osborn's case sheds light on the historical roots of the tension between individual and organizational expression in the private realm. It also adds a richness of detail to our broad social and political understanding of the right of association, and suggests that this area may be ripe for further historical inquiry.     

The “process” of patenting: Why should we care about a potential U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Doll?

In Bilski v. Doll, the U.S. Supreme Court is called to define one of the categories of patent-eligible subject matter, “process” patents. In 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the category has a narrow meaning, and that to be eligible for a process patent under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the invention must involve a machine or apparatus or involve a transformation to a different state or thing, ultimately rejecting the patent application as unpatentable subject matter. The patent applicants have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine two issues: first, the meaning of “process” in 35 U.S.C. § 101 and whether the lower court properly relied on a “machine-or-transformation” test, and second, the test's potential conflict with 35 U.S.C. § 273, which provides protection for “method[s] of doing or conducting business.” The Court's decision could change the way that research and business are done, and patent protection for such investments. Parts 1 and 2 of this article address Bilski directly and what is and is not in dispute. Part 3 addresses the “machine-or-transformation” test, while Parts 4 and 5 address reasons not to adopt such a test.     

论再审事由的程序地位——以新一元论的诉讼标的为基础

再审案件的诉讼标的不仅决定了再审审理的范围，而且进一步决定了不同的再审理由在诉讼中的相互关系以及重复再审的禁止等问题。对于这些问题，大陆法系的二元论的诉讼标的和一元论的诉讼标的均不能给予切实的解决。相反，以再审启动主体提出的再审声请为诉讼标的的新一元论，则能够切实地解决再审理由的地位、审查方法、再审理由的独立性和相互关系以及不同再审启动主体提出的再审声请之间的关系等问题，更可为我国再审案件的办理提供具体的参考。     

EMTALA: reaching beyond the emergency room to expand hospital liability

The Office of the Inspector General and private plaintiffs are vigorously pursuing EMTALA violations. These efforts are particularly troubling to hospitals, who face difficult statutory interpretation and application questions, especially in light of managed care reimbursement requirements. Two recent cases, one of them from the United States Supreme Court, expand hospital liability under EMTALA. This Article reviews current EMTALA standards and regulations, and analyzes how the recent decisions, in the absence of congressional action, are likely to impose substantial burdens upon hospitals.     

指导性案例的法源意义与确认路径——以最高人民法院公布的私法性指导性案例为研究对象

《最高人民法院关于案例指导工作的规定》确立了我国案例指导制度,由于该规定相关内容的模糊性,产生了两个需要回答的问题,一是指导性案例与英美法系判例法是否存在相同的裁判逻辑与法律效力,进而指导性案例是否具有法源意义;二是指导性案例的功能是对法官自由裁量权的控制,还是应该重视从法解释学层面去理解。建议以民法解释学为视角对最高人民法院公布的私法性指导性案例进行梳理和剖析,明确私法性指导性案例具有确认和发现法规则的功能和价值。从"法与法律区别"的自然法观视角,认为私法性指导性案例所确认和发现的法规则在我国当代具有私法法源意义。最后,从解释论和立法论两个方面,提出私法性指导性案例确认和发现的法规则的法源地位确认路径和具体建议。     

公法法治：从尊重私权开始

对法治问题的探讨已经历时久远,众所周知,法治的核心内容是基于保障个人自由和权利的需要而对国家权力施加必要的限制,现在,我们又处于一个界定权利的时代,一个认真对待权利的时代,因此,明确公法法治的目标显得尤为重要。本文的视角就在于以私权为中心,从公法内外入手来把握公法法治的问题,认为要实现公法法治,必须培育公法主体的现代法精神,使其尊重私权利,公法法治应从尊重私权开始。     

‘Private jurisprudence’ and the right to be forgotten balancing test

Upon receipt of a right to be forgotten request, private actors like Google are responsible for implementing the balancing test between competing rights of privacy and data protection and free expression and access to information. This amounts to private jurisprudence that data subjects, lawyers, and interested parties could, theoretically, game to their advantage. This paper critiques this process and argues two separate, but related points. (1) Search engines have become the sole arbiter of the rights to privacy and data protection under Articles 7 and of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, when safeguarding should be a responsibility of state authorities. (2) As private actors face litigation if their decision is not acceptable to the data subject, the right to access information and the public's right to know is compromised. Search engines exert considerable power over access to and Internet usage, yet nevertheless benefit from frameworks that permit a lack of adherence to similar human rights standards as public actors or agencies. As such, empowering search engines as decision-makers over conflicting fundamental rights is problematic. Rather than allow the content of the right to be forgotten to be fleshed out by private actors, the significant body of existing jurisprudence should form the basis for public guidelines on how to implement the right to be forgotten. An analysis of case law of national courts, the European Court of Human Rights and the CJEU reveals two related matters: it is possible to reverse engineer how search engines determine which requests will be actioned and those which will be denied. This paper argues a) collectively the body of jurisprudence is of sufficient standing to develop a public and transparent balancing test that is fair to all stakeholders and b) private actors should no longer be resolving the conflict between competing fundamental rights. The paper closes by positing a framework, loosely based on ICANN's Uniform Domain Resolution Procedure for resolving conflict between conflicting cyber property rights that provides transparency and accountability to the right to be forgotten and removes search engines as arbiters of the balancing test in select cases.     

政府特许经营合同法律性质新探

政府特许经营合同是政府与私人投资者间就市政公用行业或基础设施领域中某个项目的建设、经营、移交而签订的协议。它的法律性质在学界是一个争议颇多的问题,主要有行政合同与民事合同之争。由于政府特许经营合同兼具行政合同与民事合同的特征,不能将其归类为单纯的行政合同或民事合同。它体现的法律关系更符合经济法的调整对象,因此是经济法意义上的合同。     

人文关怀与国际私法中弱者利益保护

现代国际私法在弱者利益保护方面充分表现出人文关怀和实质公平价值取向。人文关怀是人文精神的集中体现 ,而人文精神是国际私法的永恒主题 ,国际私法的构建应贯穿人文精神。现代国际私法对弱者的人文关怀不但表现在有利原则、强制性规范和公共秩序保留等原则和制度层面 ,而且还反映在具体的法律适用规范之中     

Swiss taxation of trusts currently and in the future

At the International Trust & Tax Planning Summit Conference,held from 30 October to 1 November 2006 in Coral Gables, Florida,Frédéric Vuilleumier considered the Swiss taxregime in a paper entitled ‘Inbound Guide: What ShouldYou Do When Assumptions Change?’ In this article, theSwiss direct tax system was discussed and the distinction madebetween federal and cantonal taxation, tax residence in Switzerlandand the question of jurisdiction under Swiss private internationallaw and the application of Swiss civil law where Swiss courtshave jurisdiction and the applicable law in matrimonial matters.The article is part of that paper and concentrates on the taxtreatment of trusts in Switzerland, the current position andthe impact of the draft circular to accommodate the then expectedaccession of Switzerland to the Hague Convention.     

Polish Supreme Administrative Court says no to trade marks for trade mark attorneys

The Supreme Administrative Court of Poland rejected the cassationcomplaint brought by the Kulikowska & Kulikowski (K&K)law firm and thereby confirmed that trade mark attorneys cannotapply for trade mark registrations in their own interest.     

Does Chevron Matter?

In this article we evaluate whether the Supreme Court's much-discussed decision in Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) signaled a lasting difference in how the justices decide administrative law cases, by comparing and testing the predictions of three distinct theories of Supreme Court behavior. The legal model predicts an increase in deference to administrative agencies. This prediction is shared by the jurisprudential regime model, which also predicts that the justices evaluate key case factors differently before and after Chevron . The attitudinal model predicts no change in the justices' behavior as a result of Chevron . Although we find that attitudes matter, the fact that we also find support for the legal and jurisprudential regime models undermines the assertion of the attitudinal model that law cannot explain Supreme Court votes on the merits.     

Discerning the margins of constitutional encroachment: The drug courier profile in the airport milieu

Very little is known about the legal dimensions of the drug courier profile and how it functions in relation to airport detainments. This article attempts to fill that gap by analyzing relevant case law. Further, the authors demonstrate how the United States Supreme Court struggles to balance the competing interests of the public’s need to be protected from narcotics and drug trafficking versus the citizen’s right to be protected from unlawful searches and seizures. The article closes with a brief discussion of the implications this balancing portends for the future administration of justice in this area.     

Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd and Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: A Material Contribution to Uncertainty?

In the conjoined cases of Sienkiewicz and Willmore, the Supreme Court decided that the exceptional Fairchild approach to the proof of causation in negligence applied where a mesothelioma victim had been negligently exposed to asbestos by one defendant at a level well below unavoidable environmental asbestos exposure. The negligent exposures in both cases materially increased the risk of mesothelioma thereby satisfying the Fairchild test. Whilst reasserting the primacy of the common law as governing the rules of causation in mesothelioma cases, the Supreme Court failed to clarify the scope of the Fairchild exception. Moreover, in an extensive obiter discussion of epidemiological evidence, the Supreme Court has raised more questions than it has answered relating to the role, if any, of scientific evidence in the law of toxic torts.     

Electronic evidence: A proposal to reform the presumption of reliability and hearsay

There is a general concern amongst judges, lawyers and legal scholars that evidence in digital format is not to be trusted, given that it can be altered and manipulated with ease. Some jurists have called for a UN Convention on matters relating to the authentication and admissibility of electronic evidence. It is debatable whether such a Convention is necessary, but guidance of an international nature might be welcome, providing that any such guidance remains guidance, and does not ossify into legal requirements that fail to take into account the dynamic and constantly developing changes in information technology. In any event, the accuracy of the presumption in England & Wales that a computer is in order at the material time is highly debatable, and it is suggested that this presumption ought to be reformed.