Showing papers by "Jones Day published in 2015"
TL;DR: The U.K. Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA) came into force on October 1st, 2011 in England and Wales, and November 1st 2011 in Scotland as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: It is generally recognized that the U.K. construction industry is associated with low profit, delay in payments, cash flow concerns, short-term relationships compared with other industries, and high levels of business failure. In particular, claims and disputes have proliferated in the industry largely due to unfair payment practices. Therefore, to encourage a swifter and more economic method of resolving construction disputes by way of adjudication, the U.K. Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA) came into force on October 1st, 2011in England and Wales, and November 1st, 2011 in Scotland. This study presents the HGCRA 1996 Act—highlighting its strengths and weaknesses—along with the new 2009 Construction Act. The study additionally presents awareness of the new Act, key reasons for amending the HGCRA 1996 Act, and the impact of key changes in the Act on the dispute resolution process. The paper concludes that the new Act is perceived as being more effective at improving ca...
5 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: For example, the authors examines the Court's shifting views on corruption, applies it to various pay-to-play laws currently in effect, and ultimately concludes that the legal and constitutional framework for much of payto-pay law, as it currently stands, rests on shaky ground.
Abstract: Political spending, in all of its various permutations, lies at the nexus between campaign finance law and pay-to-play law. Both of these legal doctrines seek to minimize the corrupting effects of money upon elected officials and candidates, and both impose various caps and restrictions on political contributions in order to do so. Over the past half-century, however, the Supreme Court has struggled to define what sort of activity constitutes “corruption” in the political sphere. In light of its decisions in 2010’s Citizens United v. FEC and 2014’s McCutcheon v. FEC — two seminal cases that dramatically altered campaign finance regulation — the Court now appears to recognize that the act of gaining access to elected officials via political spending does not constitute quid pro quo corruption or the appearance thereof. This view has led to deregulation of the legal framework of campaign finance in recent years. Furthermore, at present, presupposing corruption on the part of elected officials or candidates is not always a lawful assumption upon which laws or regulations governing political spending can be based. It thus follows that the corruption-based rationale at the heart of certain federal, state, and local pay-to-play laws may also be subject to challenge. This Note examines the Court’s shifting views on corruption, applies it to various pay-to-play laws currently in effect, and ultimately concludes that the legal and constitutional framework for much of pay-to-play law, as it currently stands, rests on shaky ground.
1 citations