Anfechtung des Verpflichtungs- oder Verfügungsgeschäfts; Hemmung der Anfechtungsfristen durch Vergleichsverhandlungen

Hat (auch) der Schuldner die Einverleibung eines Rechtes beantragt, so nimmt er bis zum Zeitpunkt der Einverleibung Rechtshandlungen (bzw Unterlassungen) vor; daher ist dieser Zeitpunkt für das Vorliegen der subjektiven Voraussetzungen der Absichtsanfechtung ma?gebend. Dass auch der Vertragspartner die Einverleibung beantragen h?tte k?nnen, ist unerheblich. – Bei der Schenkungsanfechtung genügt es, wenn das (selbst?ndig anfechtbare) Verfügungsgesch?ft in der kritischen Frist liegt. – Vergleichsgespr?che k?nnen auch dann die "unverzügliche Einklagung" (§ 9 Abs 1 Z 2 AnfO) hinausschieben, wenn diese nur mit dem Schuldner ohne Einbeziehung des Anfechtungsgegners geführt werden.     

Aggression homicide and rejection homicide: a communicative classification of homicide

Based on a 10-year sample of homicides (n = 50), the hypothesis was tested that it is possible to differentiate between aggression and rejection homicide. The aggression homicide results from the offender/victim relationship, which is no longer accepted for some reason. In contrast, in the rejection homicide the offender radically strives for a goal which can only be reached if the victim is eliminated. Based on forensic-psychiatric expert opinions (n = 50), the case analyses yielded 31 aggression homicides and 18 rejection homicides, one case could not be classified. Aggression homicides differed significantly from the rejection homicides with regard to their main motives. Hate in quarrel (n = 8), violent occupation of the victim (n = 7), delusions (n = 5), revenge (n = 3), self-defence (n = 2), and jealousy (n = 1) characterized the aggression homicides, whereas rejection homicides were dominated by economic motives (n = 14). Two offenders intended to get rid of the victim and one offender wanted to rescue a third person. From a forensic-psychiatric point of view, the pertinent statistical data (social data, diagnosis, criminal responsibility) are reported and the significance of the differentiation between aggression homicide and rejection homicide for medico-legal or criminological case profiling and for the prognosis of the risk potential is discussed.     

Building the firm's political (lobbying) strategy

• In this paper, we present a framework for building a firm's issue‐specific lobbying strategy. We argue that there are five critical elements of a lobbying strategy and that the major choices concerning political lobbying strategy relate to these elements. The five elements, and the primary strategic choices concerning these elements are: (1) the choice of the level and type of inclusiveness of the strategy; (2) the choice of the form, or forms, of argument to be used in persuading relevant target constituencies; (3) the choice of jurisdictional venue to be addressed; (4) the choice of organizational target that will be engaged and (5) the choice of delivery mode—that is, whether political strategies should be implemented directly by firm managers or outsourced to professional suppliers of these services. We explain these elements in detail. However, in order to engage in a lobbying strategy on a specific issue, the firm must first be able to identify relevant government actions and understand their profitability impact. We show how the strategic logic can be generated by an augmented version of Porter's ‘five forces’ (5F) model (Porter, 1980 ) that explicitly recognizes the role of government—‘six forces’ analysis.

Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Scheduling of new psychoactive substance the Swiss way: A review and critical analysis

Since the introduction of the European Early Warning System in 2005, >700 new psychoactive substances (NPS) have been listed. This review article presents for the first time the Swiss narcotic law in perspective of scheduling of NPS, and compares it to the regulations of the German speaking neighbours Austria and Germany.The Swiss way is a fast and effective way for scheduling NPS, with the purpose to restrict drug trafficking and for controlling the NPS drug market: the legal basis for scheduling substances of abuse is the “Law about narcotics and psychotropic substances” (BetmG, SR 812.121), which includes the “narcotic law directory (BetmVV-EDI, SR 812.121.11) suitable for listing all controlled substances. The BetmVV-EDI, SR 812.121.11 contains seven indices, with index e specifically designed for the fast scheduling of NPS. Newly appearing NPS can either be controlled under a structure analogues definition or by listing single substances. The list of single substances is updated at least once per year, and structure analogues definitions can be implemented, in order to keep track with new developments on the NPS market. The latest version from November 30th 2018 contains ten different structure analogue definitions and 207 single substances. Requirements to list NPS are their appearance on the NPS market, suspected psychotropic effects and their suggestions by Forensic professionals. As soon as substances are newly placed, on Schedule I of the 1961 Convention or Schedule II of the 1971 Convention by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the World Health Organization they can easily be transferred from index e to index a-d of the BetmVV-EDI, SR 812.121.11. The Austrian law uses a structure analogue and single substances approach (introduced in 2012, one update in 2016), whereas the German NPS law (established in 2016, no update yet) only lists two structure-analogue-definitions. All three legislations have defined which core structures, kinds and sites of substitutions are regulated.