Showing papers on "Principal (commercial law) published in 2013"

Origin of the Theory of Agency: An Account By One of the Theory's Originators

Abstract: The first scholars to propose, explicitly, that a theory of agency be created, and to actually begin its creation, were Stephen Ross and Barry Mitnick, independently and roughly concurrently. Ross is responsible for the origin of the economic theory of agency, and Mitnick for the institutional theory of agency, though the basic concepts underlying these approaches are similar. Indeed, the approaches can be seen as complementary in their uses of similar concepts under different assumptions. In short, Ross introduced the study of agency in terms of problems of compensation contracting; agency was seen, in essence, as an incentives problem. Mitnick introduced the now common insight that institutions form around agency, and evolve to deal with agency, in response to the essential imperfection of agency relationships: Behavior never occurs as it is preferred by the principal because it does not pay to make it perfect. But society creates institutions that attend to these imperfections, managing or buffering them, adapting to them, or becoming chronically distorted by them. Thus, to fully understand agency, we need both streams -- to see the incentives as well as the institutional structures. This paper describes the origin and early years of the theory, placing its development in the context of other research in this area.

Autonomous weapon systems and international humanitarian law: a reply to the critics

Abstract: In November 2012, Human Rights Watch, in collaboration with the International Human Rights Clinic at Harvard Law School, released Losing Humanity: The Case against Killer Robots.[2] Human Rights Watch is among the most sophisticated of human rights organizations working in the field of international humanitarian law. Its reports are deservedly influential and have often helped shape application of the law during armed conflict. Although this author and the organization have occasionally crossed swords,[3] we generally find common ground on key issues. This time, we have not. “Robots” is a colloquial rendering for autonomous weapon systems. Human Rights Watch’s position on them is forceful and unambiguous: “[F]ully autonomous weapons would not only be unable to meet legal standards but would also undermine essential non-safeguards for civilians.”[4] Therefore, they “should be banned and . . . governments should urgently pursue that end.”[5] In fact, if the systems cannot meet the legal standards cited by Human Rights Watch, then they are already unlawful as such under customary international law irrespective of any policy or treaty law ban on them.[6] Unfortunately, Losing Humanity obfuscates the on-going legal debate over autonomous weapon systems. A principal flaw in the analysis is a blurring of the distinction between international humanitarian law’s prohibitions on weapons per se and those on the unlawful use of otherwise lawful weapons.[7] Only the former render a weapon illegal as such. To illustrate, a rifle is lawful, but may be used unlawfully, as in shooting a civilian. By contrast, under customary international law, biological weapons are unlawful per se; this is so even if they are used against lawful targets, such as the enemy’s armed forces. The practice of inappropriately conflating these two different strands of international humanitarian law has plagued debates over other weapon systems, most notably unmanned combat aerial systems such as the armed Predator. In addition, some of the report’s legal analysis fails to take account of likely developments in autonomous weapon systems technology or is based on unfounded assumptions as to the nature of the systems. Simply put, much of Losing Humanity is either counter-factual or counter-normative. This Article is designed to infuse granularity and precision into the legal debates surrounding such weapon systems and their use in the future “battlespace.” It suggests that whereas some conceivable autonomous weapon systems might be prohibited as a matter of law, the use of others will be unlawful only when employed in a manner that runs contrary to international humanitarian law’s prescriptive norms. This Article concludes that Losing Humanity’s recommendation to ban the systems is insupportable as a matter of law, policy, and operational good sense. Human Rights Watch’s analysis sells international humanitarian law short by failing to appreciate how the law tackles the very issues about which the organization expresses concern. Perhaps the most glaring weakness in the recommendation is the extent to which it is premature. No such weapons have even left the drawing board. To ban autonomous weapon systems altogether based on speculation as to their future form is to forfeit any potential uses of them that might minimize harm to civilians and civilian objects when compared to other systems in military arsenals.

A companion to Justinian's Institutes

Abstract: Written to accompany the Birks and McLeod translation of "Justinian's Institutes", this book takes up all the principal subjects in the "Institutes" and gives a description of the law on each subject, including chapters on: the sources of law; the law of persons; the law of property; the law of succession; the law of obligations; the law of actions; and criminal trials. Each chapter gives comprehensive guidance on ancient and modern sources and contains a bibliography for further reading. The technical legal vocabulary used in both books is set out in detail, and tables of authorities are included. The book is suitable as a student textbook commenting on a source fundamental to the study of Roman Law.

Territorial jurisdiction and criminalization

Abstract: The nature of jurisdiction and its relation to the criminal law is either poorly understood or neglected altogether. Jurisdiction is often viewed either as a purely technical matter – a procedural hurdle to be crossed before a court can hear a particular case – or as something linked pragmatically to the limits of enforcement of the law. This is particularly true in relation to territorial jurisdiction, where the idea of territory is treated as though it were natural and self-evident, without acknowledgement of the way that it is shaped by particular legal and political institutions. The present article has two aims. First it identifies and analyses the principal features of the paradigm of territorial jurisdiction as this has developed in English law, looking in particular at the way the idea of ‘territory’ has shaped and been shaped by the development of the criminal law. It then goes on to explore the relationship between jurisdiction and criminalization by showing how the development of the paradigm of territorial jurisdiction was linked, not only to the emergence and form of certain laws, but more generally to the idea of a criminal law as a body of norms applied consistently and seamlessly within a given legal space.

Justifying Fiduciary Duties

Abstract: Fiduciary duties are critical to the integrity of a remarkable variety of relationships, including those between trustee and beneficiary, director and corporation, agent and principal, lawyer and client, doctor and patient, parent and child, and guardian and ward. Notwithstanding their variety, all fiduciary relationships are presumed to enjoy common characteristics and to attract a core set of demanding legal duties, most notably a duty of loyalty. Surprisingly, however, the justification for fiduciary duties is an enigma in private law theory. It is unclear what makes a relationship fiduciary and why fiduciary relationships attract fiduciary duties. This article takes up the enigma. It assesses leading reductivist and instrumentalist analyses of the justification for fiduciary duties. Finding them wanting, it offers an alternative account of the juridical justification for fiduciary duties. The author contends that the fiduciary relationship is a distinctive kind of legal relationship in which one person (the fiduciary) exercises power over practical interests of another (the beneficiary). Fiduciary power is a form of authority derived from the legal capacity of the beneficiary or a benefactor. The duty of loyalty is justified on the basis that it secures the exclusivity of the beneficiary’s claim over fiduciary power so understood.

Agency: Law and Principles

Abstract: 1 Introductory Matters 2 The Actual Authority of an Agent 3 The Apparent Authority of an Agent 4 Agency of Necessity 5 Want of Authority and Ratification 6 Legal Relations between Principal and Agent 7 Legal Relations between Principal and Third Party 8 Unauthorised Dispositions of Property by the Agent 9 Principal's Liability for the Torts of the Agent 10 Legal Relations between Agent and Third Party 11 Sub-agency 12 Termination of Agency

Plain Packaging and the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement

Abstract: Plain packaging of cigarettes as a way of reducing tobacco consumption and its related health costs and effects raises a number of international trade law issues. The plain packaging measures adopted in Australia impose strict format requirements on word trademarks (such as Marlboro or Camel) and ban the use of figurative marks (colors, logos, etc.). As a result, questions have been raised as to plain packaging’s compatibility with the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). WTO members can validly take measures to protect and promote public health, but in doing so they must comply with the WTO agreements. In order to determine compliance, a proper method to interpret applicable WTO rules is indispensable for the stability and predictability of the world ∗ Professor of Law, Victoria University of Wellington. Thanks to Thomas McKenzie and Michelle Limenta for research assistance. The authors also thank Mark Bennett and Rochelle Dreyfuss for their generous comments on earlier versions of this Article. ♦ Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School. 1150 vanderbilt journal of transnational law [vol. 46:1149 trading system. In this Article, the authors consider the proper interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement as it applies to plain packaging regulations using the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The VCLT has been adopted several times in WTO disputes as a set of interpretive rules. The authors argue that the interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement in the cases filed in 2012 against Australia by a number of developing countries after Australia’s adoption of the plain packaging legislation is likely to impact future cases involving the TRIPS Agreement and specifically the method and approach to be used to interpret it. As such, the cases will likely impact other public health issues (beyond tobacco use) and the interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement in several other contexts. The two major issues discussed in this Article are (a) Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement, which prohibits certain unjustified encumbrances on the use of trademarks, and (b) the debate about the nature of trademark owners’ rights in the TRIPS Agreement. The latter issue has been referred to as the “right to use” debate—namely, whether trademark owners have a right to use trademarks protected under the TRIPS Agreement. The authors contend that the issue is better seen as a debate over the nature and scope of trademark owners’ rights and interests that the TRIPS Agreement seeks to protect. Specifically, the Article argues that the fact that the principal rights of trademark owners under the TRIPS Agreement are rights to exclude others from using their mark (or “negative rights”) is not determinative of the issue but rather should inform the interpretation of Article 20 in light of the TRIPS Agreement’s object and purpose.

Analysing the economic justification for the reforms to social welfare and family law legal aid

Abstract: The Ministry of Justice plans on saving £450 million per annum from the legal aid budget through reforms contained in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.Over 60% of these savings will be found by removing whole areas of law and types of problem from the scope of legal aid support. One of the principal justifications for these reforms is the economic imperative; reducing legal aid expenditure is necessary to meet the Government's fiscal targets. This article examined whether these reforms will generate the substantial savings identified in the Government's impact assessment, or whether these costs will be passed on to other areas of government. Data from the Civil and Social Justice Survey were used to model the behavioural responses of people no longer eligible for legal aid under the scope changes. Economic costs were estimated for these responses where they will be incurred by the state, although many of these costs are likely to be underestimates. Many costs could not be estimated including, inter alia, the cost of increased criminality where people seek redress outside of the justice system. The analysis focused on family and social welfare law, which together represent 82% of the proposed savings from the scope reforms. Based upon this analysis, the Government is unlikely to save more than 40% of its prediction. At the same time, these minimal savings could generate inequality of access to justice and overburden an already struggling alternative advice sector. A significant uptake in funded mediation within family law is predicted. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Violence in Fascist Criminal Law Discourse: War, Repression and Anti-Democracy

Abstract: This article constructs a critical historical, political and theoretical analysis of the essence of Fascist criminal law discourse in terms of the violence that shaped and characterised it. The article examines the significance of violence in key declarations about the role and purpose of criminal law by Alfredo Rocco, Fascist Minister of Justice and leading ideologue, in his principal speech on the final draft of the 1930 Italian Penal Code. It is grounded on the premise that criminal law is particularly significant for understanding the relationship between State power and individuals, and so what was distinctive about Fascist thinking in this regard. The article analyses Rocco’s declarations as a discourse in order to highlight their contextual foundations, construction and ideological connections. It argues that the core theme of that discourse is violence, which has three principal dimensions: a close historical and rhetorical connection with war, a focus on repressive and intimidatory force, and a paramount concern with subordinating individuals to State interests. The article then uses this analysis to develop a theoretical reading of the nexus between criminal law and violence in Fascism, in terms of its foundations and reversal of ends and means. The article thus provides an original perspective on Fascism and criminal law, which it argues is important for critical engagement with criminal law discourse in our democracies today.

Blackstone's Criminal Practice 2013

Abstract: Michael Hirst is a principal contributing author (12 chapters) of this leading reference work for criminal law practitioners and judges, and is an online editor/updater for the entire work, which is now in its 23rd edition. It is published in hardback, with supplements, as an e-book, with supplements, and online, with monthly updates

Good University Income Generating Governance in Indonesia: Agency Theory Perspective

Abstract: The objective of this study aims to comprehend and portray the management opinions of the three Public Service Board (PSB) universities in Indonesia dealing with the good university income generating governance. Furthermore, this study applies epistemological subjectivism, interpretivism paradigm with multi-site design. The findings were analyzed using agency theory perspective. Therefore, the finding results show that the principles of good university income generating governance is law-abiding, academic oriented, accountable, professional, independent and transparent. The emergence of the principle of law-abiding indicate hierarchical relations agency that is purely between the government and the universities in income generation. The principle of academic orientation, accountability, independence and autonomy suggests that the goal synergy of both principal and the agent are the essence of agency relationship. Meanwhile, the professionalism demonstrated that the agent fully realizes which the principal requires certain tasks to be implemented by the agents because agents have the skills required. Yet, independence gained through wide autonomy both on academic as well as non-academic matters. The principle of transparency demonstrates the importance of the information factor in agency relationship. Agent transparency is necessary for the principal due to the difficulty in obtaining information dealing with the headway of the agent itself. Keywords: Good University Governance, Income Generating, Agency Theory

(Judicial) Love is not a One-Way Street: the EU preliminary reference procedure as a Model for ECtHR advisory opinions under draft Protocol No.16

Abstract: Owing to the overwhelming number of applications before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Draft Protocol No.16 proposes the introduction of a new advisory opinion procedure. This procedure aims at alleviating Strasbourg's judicial workload by enabling the domestic courts of the contracting parties to request advisory opinions on alleged human rights violations, which could in turn serve as precedents for future applications. The principal purpose of this article is to present the most important provisions and legal consequences of the newly proposed advisory opinion procedure; but also, as this procedure draws certain inspirations from the European Union's preliminary reference procedure, the article aims to contrast these provisions with their respective counterparts in EU law (with respect to both the implications and legal effects of art.267 TFEU (ex art.234 EC) and Court of Justice case law); to examine the similarities and differences between those two mechanisms; to show legal difficulties that may arise owing to the proposed advisory opinion procedure; and to explore the extent to which Strasbourg could use Court of Justice case law to develop its advisory opinion jurisdiction further.

A General Law on Administrative Procedure, Legislative Competence and Judicial Competence

Abstract: The desirability having a general law on administrative procedure has been debated in the past and has now come back on the agenda, in part at least because of support from the Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament If such a law, or something equivalent thereto, is developed there will be a range of issues to address concerning its scope and content This article considers the rationale for such an instrument, and the type of subject matter that might be included The principal focus is however on the logically prior issue as to the competence to enact such an instrument This was questioned in the pre-Lisbon world, and question marks remain post-Lisbon It will be seen moreover that resolution of this question raises interesting and important issues concerning the relationship between legislative and judicial competence within the EU

The Fiduciary Obligations of Financial Advisors Under the Law of Agency

Abstract: This paper considers how agency fiduciary law might be applied to a financial advisor with discretionary trading authority over a client's account. It (i) surveys the agency problem to which the fiduciary obligation is directed; (ii) examines the legal context by considering how the fiduciary obligation undertakes to mitigate this problem; and (iii) examines several potential applications of agency fiduciary law to financial advisors, including principal trades and the role of informed consent by the client, organizing the discussion under the great fiduciary rubrics of loyalty and care. This paper was sponsored by Federated Investors, Inc.

State-Owned Enterprises: Trade Effects and Policy Implications

Abstract: With a growing integration via trade and investment, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) that have traditionally been oriented towards domestic markets increasingly compete with private firms in the global market place. Three principal questions emerge from the international trade perspective: (1) How important is state ownership in the global economy; (2) What types of advantages granted to SOEs by governments (or disadvantages afflicting them) are inconsistent with the key principles of the non-discriminatory trading system; and (3) What policies and practices support effective competition among all market participants? Using a sample of world‘s largest firms and their foreign subsidiaries, this paper shows that the extent of state presence in various countries and economic sectors is significant. Moreover, many of the countries with the highest SOE shares and economic sectors with strong SOE presence are intensely traded. The potential for economic distortions is hence large, if some of these SOEs benefit from unfair advantages granted to them by governments–an allegation that is often raised in political and business circles. Existing information on such advantages is often either anecdotal or limited to individual cases. As a groundwork for future analysis and building on the existing information and literature, this paper presents a conceptual discussion of how potential SOE advantages can generate cross-border effects. It also describes several cases when actions of SOEs as well as advantages allegedly granted to them by governments have been contested as inconsistent with national or international regulations, albeit with varying degree of success. This may be partially explained by the fact that existing regulatory frameworks that discipline some forms of anti-competitive behaviour of SOEs have been designed with domestic objectives in mind or were conceived at times when the state sector was oriented primarily towards domestic markets. The survey of existing rules at the national, bilateral and multilateral levels presented in this paper is a first step in determining whether there is a need to fill any gaps and in finding the most constructive ways of doing so.

Conflict Minerals and the Law of Pillage

Abstract: The illicit exploitation of natural resources — often called conflict minerals — has been associated with some of the worst violence in the past half-century, especially in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Prosecutors and scholars have struggled to develop legal tools to adequately hold accountable those who have been responsible for the exploitation of civilians and resources in conflict. The most common legal tool, the crime of pillage, has been inadequate because it has been applied only to discrete, relatively small episodes of theft. As important as it has been, the episodic theory is of limited utility when applied to what have been called resource wars in which combatants struggled for control over access to exploitable resources. In these conflicts, there was substantial evidence that a principal reason for the conflict and an important source of revenue to fund the various fighting forces was resource revenue. In response, scholars and advocates have attempted to develop a corporate theory of the crime of pillage. The corporate theory calls for the prosecution of individuals or entities who purchase or use resources derived from conflict areas or that are extracted under the direction of those involved in the war. The problem with the two dominant theories of pillage is that the episodic theory of prosecution fits squarely into existing law but is too narrow to address the kinds of harms that occur in modern resource wars, and the corporate theory of prosecution fits the facts but is too broad to fit comfortably into existing law. What has been missing is a theory that fits the facts more closely while at the same time fitting more easily into existing law. This Article supplies such a theory, one that is consistent with the law underpinning the traditional episodic theory while accomplishing some of the goals of the corporate theory. Under the systematic approach, individuals could face prosecution for their participation in large-scale pillage operations, such as controlling a mine whose proceeds were used to fund the fighting. Using the International Criminal Court’s ongoing prosecution of Bosco Ntaganda, a notorious Congolese warlord, as a case study, this Article shows that the systematic theory of pillage would allow for prosecution when individuals created a process or system by which to engage in exploit resources they did not own — a form of theft — when that exploitation was sufficiently connected to the overall conflict.

Kicking the Bucket: It's All about Living.

Abstract: involvement is part of the doing. The legal principle relating to criminal liability is known as accomplice liability, accessory, or, in more cyclopedia Corpus Juris Secundum, section 132, states that, “depending on the circumstances, an accused may be charged as a principal, or under an aiding and abetting theory as an accomplice or accessory after the fact. To be convicted as a principal under the Bank Robbery Act, it is not necessary that the defendant actually hold dia, section 59, further notes that, “Liability for aiding and abetting the commission of a bank robbery extends to all parts of the robbery, including the escape phase. Thus, a person who aids the escape may be found guilty of aiding and abetting the armed robbery, rather

The margin of appreciation, domestic irregularity and domestic court rulings in ECHR environmental jurisprudence: Global legal pluralism in action

Abstract: Global legal pluralism is concerned, inter alia, with the growing multiplicity of normative legal orders and the ways in which these different orders intersect and are accommodated with one another. The different means used for accommodation will have a critical bearing on how individuals fare within them. This article examines the recent environmental jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to explore some of the means of reaching an accommodation between national legal orders and the European Convention. Certain types of accommodation – such as the margin of appreciation given to states by the Court – are well known. In essence, such mechanisms of legal pluralism raise a presumptive barrier which generally works for the state and against the individual rights-bearer. However, the principal focus of the current article is on a less well-known, recent set of pluralistic devices employed by the Court, which typically operate presumptively in the other direction, in favour of the individual. First, the Court looks to instances of breaches of domestic environmental law (albeit not in isolation); and second, it places an emphasis on whether domestic courts have ruled against the relevant activity. Where domestic standards have been breached or national courts have ruled against the state, then, presumptive weight is typically shifted towards the individual.

Global non-state auspices of security governance

Abstract: A major question that has occupied scholars who have considered the development of nonstate governing entities has been their sources of authority and how these have been constituted. The principal argument that has been put forward is that their authority, to the extent that they have legitimate authority and are not acting illegitimately, is a delegated authority that is granted to them by nation-states. For example, within the sphere of security governance, private sector providers of policing services derive whatever authority they have from state law – primarily property law and contract law.

The Mens Rea of Accomplice Liability: Supporting Intentions

Abstract: Accomplice liability makes someone guilty of a crime he never committed, so long as he helped or influenced the perpetrator and did so with the required mens rea. Just what that mens rea should be has been contested for more than a century. Here I consider three major approaches and find them all wanting. I propose rejecting their common (but rarely questioned) assumption that what matters is the helper's mental state toward the perpetrator's commission of an offense. I suggest considering instead his stance toward the perpetrator's intention to act: a helper is an accomplice, on this view, if he (a) intends to see to it that the principal form or keep his own plan to commit an offense and (b) does not intend or expect that plan's frustration. This standard better justifies imposing accomplice liability. It more precisely picks out those helpers culpable for the perpetrator's very offense. And this parity of guilt is the best -- perhaps the only good -- basis for imposing the same liability on accomplice and principal, in a system so retribution-driven as to choose to do so at all.

Firm’s tax evasion in a principal-agent model with self-protection

Abstract: Gatekeepers have an increasing role in taxation and regulation. Whereas burdening them with legal liability for misconducts that benefit those who resort to their services actually discourages wrongdoings—as will be clarified in the article—an alienation effect can also arise. The gatekeeper might become more interested in covering up the illegal behavior. This article studies the problem with respect to tax evasion by firms in a principal-agent framework. It highlights the role of legal rules pertaining to liability for tax evasion in shaping the choices of the parties, as concealment costs vary according to whether the risk-neutral principal or the riskaverse agent is held responsible when tax evasion is detected. The main result of the analysis is that there is a simple ex post test that can be carried out to infer whether harnessing the agent was socially beneficial.

The Law of Climate Change Mitigation: An Overview

Abstract: I provide an introduction to and overview of the principal legal approaches being developed to compel climate mitigation. These legal approaches to mitigation can be grouped into three broad categories: (1) negotiation of an international climate agreement, (2) adoption or enforcement of domestic mitigation measures (primarily statutes), and (3) lawsuits to impose a legal obligation (not defined simply by enforcement of an existing treaty or statute) that compels emissions reductions or compensation (catalyst litigation).

The Impact of Corporate Taxes and Flexibility on Entrepreneurial Decisions with Moral Hazard and Simultaneous Firm and Personal Level Taxation

Abstract: In this paper we investigate the incentive effects of corporate taxes in an agency setting with a principal facing an investment opportunity including an abandonment option. We are particularly interested in the interplay of taxation and the real option on the principal’s incentives to motivate the agent to work hard. First, we extend the well-known studies on tax effects on decision making under uncertainty to moral hazard settings. In a benchmark case we find that, as confirmed in current literature, the corporate income tax has no incentive effect. If the principal accounts for the real option we show that paradoxical tax effects may occur. Also, with respect to the effect of the real option on the incentive problem we show that the option makes it less attractive for the principal to induce the agent to exert a high effort.

The Mens Rea of Accomplice Liability: Supporting Intentions

Abstract: Accomplice liability makes someone guilty of a crime he never committed, so long as he helped or influenced the perpetrator and did so with the required mens rea. Just what that mens rea should be has been contested for more than a century. Here I consider three major approaches and find them all wanting. I propose rejecting their common (but rarely questioned) assumption that what matters is the helper’s mental state toward the perpetrator’s commission of an offense. I suggest considering instead his stance toward the perpetrator’s intention to act: a helper is an accomplice, on this view, if he (a) intends to see to it that the principal form or keep his own plan to commit an offense and (b) does not intend or expect that plan’s frustration. This standard better justifies imposing accomplice liability. It more precisely picks out those helpers culpable for the perpetrator’s very offense. And this parity of guilt is the best—perhaps the only good—basis for imposing the same liability on accomplice and principal, in a system so retribution-driven as to choose to do so at all. author. Yale Law School, J.D. expected 2016; Princeton University, Ph.D. expected 2016; University of Oxford, B.Phil. 2010; Princeton University, A.B. 2008. This Note was born of a stimulating seminar with Facundo Alonso; matured with exceptional help from Gideon Yaffe, John James Snidow, John Lewis, and Ben Eidelson; and owes its weaknesses to the author. the mens rea of accomplice liability

The Utility of Official Antarctic Inspections: Symbolism without Sanction?

Abstract: In its modern history—less than 200 years old—the continent of Antarctica and its surrounding oceans have been discovered, explored, exploited (the marine resources) and subjected to a broad‐ranging legal regime aimed at regulating and managing uses of the region and its resources. Some law came after the fact (e.g. the conservation of seals 53) and some preempted a rush on resources (e.g. the fishing convention54 and the minerals convention55). But the principal legal instrument that spawned all the others, and contained the ideological basis for today’s management approaches, was the Antarctic Treaty of 1959.

The limits of normative legal pluralism: Review of Paul Schiff Berman, Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law beyond Borders

Abstract: For more than a decade, Paul Schiff Berman has been one of the leading advocates of the normative virtues of legal pluralism. In his book Global Legal Pluralism (CUP, 2012), Berman articulates the core features of his pluralist position. He attempts to make a convincing case for the acceptability and superiority of legal pluralism as the normative framework in dealing with the existence of multiple normative realms.In this essay, we argue that, as it currently stands, legal pluralism does not provide a sufficiently adequate normative framework for managing conflict between and among normative orders. The principal reason for this stance is our conclusion that its basic premises are implausible. Berman’s argument helps us in illuminating the challenges legal pluralists have to overcome if they really want to provide a suitable and cogent alternative to global constitutionalism in relation to the growing complexity of law and its relations to other sources of normativity.For Berman’s reply to our argument, see his "How legal pluralism is and is not distinct from liberalism: A response to Alexis Galan and Dennis Patterson" (2013) 11(3) International Journal of Constitutional Law 801.

Relationship principal-agent or principal-principal conflicts and islamic banks performances / Azilawati Banchit, Zakaria Boulanouar, Nirosha Hewa Wellalage and Sazali Zainal Abidin

Abstract: Recently, it has been identified that firms in developing economies suffer an agency conflict called principal-principal (PP) conflict, distinct from the traditional principal-agent (PA) conflicts. Little is known about these conflicts in the Islamic banks. Using five years panel from 37 Islamic banks across ten countries, this paper investigates the relationship of these conflicts and their impact to the banks‟ performances. Results show that PA is the main concern, with inconclusive results for PP conflicts. This cross-country study helps to establish the existence of agency conflicts in Islamic banking and adds to the growing knowledge of PP conflicts.

Internationally Wrongful Acts in the Domestic Courts: The Contribution of Domestic Courts to the Development of Customary International Law Relating to the Engagement of International Responsibility

Abstract: The rules of customary international law governing when a state or international organization will be held to have committed an internationally wrongful act, thereby engaging its international responsibility, are relatively well settled in international practice and jurisprudence. A key point of reference in this regard is the work of the International Law Commission on State Responsibility and Responsibility of International Organizations. The present paper examines relevant practice of domestic courts from a variety of jurisdictions which have relied upon the ILC's work, and discusses the extent to which domestic courts may make a contribution to the further development of the rules relating to engagement of responsibility. It concludes that, due to the operation of rules of, inter alia, immunity and non-justiciability, the principal instance in which domestic courts may actually apply the rules of international law is where it is the responsibility of the forum state which is in issue.

Legislation, Empirical Research and Juridical Law

Abstract: This article looks at the incorporation of empirical research into legislation from a juridical law perspective. Juridical law is characterized by four elements: autonomous and artificial reasoning; making statements to authorize factual actions; mobilizing helpers of the proponent and de-mobilizing allies of the opponent; and redressing violations that occurred in the past. According to the juridical perspective, there are two forms of legislation which, in combination with the incorporation of empirical insights, generate the principal tension with law. Firstly, legislation that is predominantly forward looking and aimed at improving behaviour or promoting certain end states rather than redressing wrongful behaviour that occurred in the past. Secondly, legislation that authorizes and enables the performance of factual actions by authorities.