Vultures in Courts: Why the UNCTAD Principles on Responsible Financing Cannot Stop Litigation

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 849-862 ◽  
Author(s):  
MAURO MEGLIANI
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Financial Markets ◽  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Abusive Behaviour

AbstractThe decision of the US Supreme Court rendered in NML v. Argentina has enabled the vulture funds to enforce in full their claims against the payments to be made by Argentina in favour of those holders who had tendered their bonds under a previous exchange offer. This scenario may have a disruptive impact on the functioning of the financial markets and endanger the restructuring processes of sovereign debt. The race to the courts by the vulture funds could be stopped under the UNCTAD Principles on Responsible Financing where the behaviour of those creditors who acquire debt instruments of sovereigns in distress and remain aloof from a restructuring to secure preferential treatment is marked as abusive. Unfortunately, so far the legal status of this abusive behaviour is unable to overturn the interpretation of the pari passu clause under New York law given by the US Federal Courts which stands at the base of the problem. To overcome this impasse the suggestion is to insert in the UN proposal of a multilateral legal framework for sovereign restructuring processes a specific provision qualifying as overriding a mandatory restructuring plan approved through a certain quorum which has received certification by the IMF. This qualification would serve the purpose of applying the plan to all creditors, and not just to those who register under the process. Moreover, this qualification would be considered as part of the public policy of the states participating to the UN proposal so as to block the enforcement of judgments rendered in non-participating fora.

THE LEGAL STATUS OF CENTRAL BANK INVESTMENTS UNDER ENGLISH LAW

1998 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 374-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM BLAIR
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Central Banks ◽  
The Public ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
The Us ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Special Provision ◽  
Made In

Central banks have enormous sums of money in various forms of investments. When claims are made either against the banks themselves, or against other governmental bodies, issues arise as to whether these assets can be attached, and made available to satisfy judgments. The article explains how central banks are treated in English law. It explains the special provision made in respect of their assets under the State Immunity Act 1978. There is wide immunity from attachment, though questions can arise as to the ownership of such assets. The UK legislation is, in some respects, wider than its counterpart, the US Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976. Recent case law is described in which the English courts have recognised that the public responsibilities of central banks have to be taken account of when determining the extent of their liability to attachment.

Handguns: Risks versus Benefits

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 781-782
Author(s):  
KATHERINE K. CHRISTOFFEL ◽  
TOM CHRISTOFFEL
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The United States ◽  
Gun Control ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
P 16

THE ISSUE There are an estimated 40 to 50 million handguns in the United States, with approximately 2 million more being manufactured annually1 (The New York Times, July 9, 1985, p 16). The high prevalence of handgun injury in the United States is unique in all the world and is increasing. Children are among the growing legions of US citizens harmed by the handgun epidemic.2 The effort to control handguns is focussed on developing laws to control their manufacture, importation, purchase, possession, and use. Opponents of these legal approaches claim that gun control endangers constitutional freedoms. When asked, the US Supreme court has consistently rejected that position in favor of the view that the Second Amendment protects a collective, not a personal, right to bear arms.3,4

scholarly journals One issue, different stories: The construction of GMO issues on Chinese, American and British mainstream media portals

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 255-275
Author(s):  
Yiqin Ruan ◽  
Jing Yang ◽  
Jianbin Jin
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mainstream Media ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Uk

Biotechnology, as an emerging technology, has drawn much attention from the public and elicited hot debates in countries around the world and among various stakeholders. Due to the public's limited access to front-line scientific information and scientists, as well as the difficulty of processing complex scientific knowledge, the media have become one of the most important channels for the public to get news about scientific issues such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). According to framing theory, how the media portray GMO issues may influence audiences’ perceptions of those issues. Moreover, different countries and societies have various GMO regulations, policies and public opinion, which also affect the way media cover GMO issues. Thus, it is necessary to investigate how GMO issues are covered in different media outlets across different countries. We conducted a comparative content analysis of media coverage of GMO issues in China, the US and the UK. One mainstream news portal in each of the three countries was chosen ( People's Daily for China, The New York Times for the US, and The Guardian for the UK). We collected coverage over eight years, from 2008 to 2015, which yielded 749 pieces of news in total. We examined the sentiments expressed and the generic frames used in coverage of GMO issues. We found that the factual, human interest, conflict and regulation frames were the most common frames used on the three portals, while the sentiments expressed under those frames varied across the media outlets, indicating differences in the state of GMO development, promotion and regulation among the three countries.

Religion and the Public School Curriculum

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Feinberg
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
Background Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Teaching Religion ◽  
Humanistic Study ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter provides background information on the relationship between religion and public schools and then describes the different kinds of religion courses currently offered in some public schools. While the US Supreme Court has banned compulsory devotional religious exercises, it has not banned the nondevotional teaching of religion. The different types of religion courses command different kinds of justifications, and the legal and educational merits of these justifications are presented. The author concludes by proposing a case for teaching religion that is both constitutionally and educationally acceptable. This case rests upon the importance of the development of autonomy to the liberal tradition, and it shows how the teaching of religion as a humanistic study can serve this ideal.

scholarly journals Review of Digitize and Punish: Racial Criminalization in the Digital Age by Brian Jefferson (University of Minnesota Press)

Lateral ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastasia Kārkliņa
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
New York City ◽  
Digital Technology ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
War On Drugs ◽  
University Of Minnesota ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Drugs And Crime

In Digitize and Punish, Brian Jefferson argues that the US policing and incarceration infrastructure is increasingly marked by new forms of racialized digital criminalization. Examining the incorporation of digital technologies into the criminal justice apparatus, Jefferson shows the central role that digital technology and data science has had in reinforcing racial surveillance practices since the War on Drugs and Crime began more than four decades ago. Jefferson’s timely new book traces the merging of carcerality and technology in Chicago and New York City, unveiling forms of digital racial management that have remained largely obscured from the public.

scholarly journals Vėliava – Flag – Drapeau, arba Ir vėl apie žmogaus teises

Teisė ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 18-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gediminas Mesonis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Liberal Conception ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Anglo American

Straipsnyje analizuojama, kokią reikšmę turi skirtingos koncepcijos atskleidžiant konkrečios žmogaus teisės turinį. Konstatuojama, kad net „Vakarų“ demokratinėse valstybėse sprendžiant dėl žmogaus teisių turinio nuolat konkuruoja individualistinis ir traibalistinis požiūris į žmogaus teises. Esama koncepcijų dichotomija šiame straipsnyje iliustruojama žodžio laisvės turinio raidos kontekste. Straipsnyje į šios teisės turinio raidą žvelgiama per valstybės vėliavos teisinį statusą, analizuojant Jungtinių Amerikos Valstijų Aukščiausiojo Teismo jurisprudencijos ir kitų šalių teisinio reguliavimo patirtį. Konstatuojama, kad anglų–amerikiečių (liberalioji) žmogaus teisių ir laisvių koncepcija, spręsdama žmogaus teisės turinio problemą, prioritetą linkusi atiduoti konkretaus asmens, o ne grupės interesui.The article analyses the significance of different conceptions in disclosing the content of a concrete human right. It is stated that even in “western” democratic states, when one decides regarding the content of human rights, there is continuous competition between the individualistic and tribalistic approach to human rights. The existing dichotomy of these conceptions is illustrated in the context of the development of the content of freedom of speech. In the article the development of the content of this right is considered through the legal status of the flag, while analysing the experience of the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court and that of legal regulation of other countries. It is stated that the Anglo-American (liberal) conception of human rights, while deciding the issue of the content of a human right, tends to give priority to the interest of a concrete person, but not that of a group.

scholarly journals Of Whites and men: How gender and race impact authorship of published and unpublished opinions in the US courts of appeals

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205316801876286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Tillman ◽  
Rachael K. Hinkle
Keyword(s):  
Demographic Characteristics ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Original Dataset ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Empirical Tests ◽  
Circuit Courts

While authorship assignment has been studied extensively in the US Supreme Court, relatively little is known about such decisions in the intermediate federal courts. Moreover, what we know about circuit courts relates only to published opinions (those which constitute precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis and, thus, influence policy). Little is known about authorship of less influential unpublished opinions. Distinguishing between the costs, benefits, and risks inherent in authoring published versus unpublished opinions, we develop and test theoretical expectations about how demographic characteristics of opinion assignors and assignees influence authorship across opinion type. We conduct empirical tests using an exhaustive original dataset containing all authored dispositive circuit panel opinions issued in 2012. The results reveal that White and male judges are more likely to assign White and male judges to write published opinions and less likely to assign them to write unpublished opinions. The substantive sizes of the discrepancies are somewhat modest, but our results indicate that judges from historically disadvantaged groups have fewer opportunities to shape policy and they shoulder a disproportionately larger share of the routine chore of resolving individual cases.

Book Reviews

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 1199-1201
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Monetary Theory ◽  
New York University ◽  
The Public ◽  
Federal Deficit ◽  
The Us

Alberto Bisin of New York University reviews The Defcit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy,“ by Stephanie Kelton. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Examines the US federal deficit and its relationship to the economy through the lens of modern monetary theory (MMT), focusing on dispelling misunderstandings about the national deficit that have shaped the public discourse.”.

Part 2 Specific Issues of Arbitration in Brazil, 11 Project Finance, PPP, and Concession Agreements

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sester Peter
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
State Level ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Project Finance ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
The Public ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
New Type ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter examines investment arbitration in Brazil. In the 1990s, the country signed a dozen Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). These included clauses modelled on the framework for classic investor-state-arbitration. However, these BITs were never ratified and there are no signs that this will soon change. In recent years, Brazil has entered into a new type of investment agreement with a number of emerging markets. These contracts do not provide for investor-state-arbitration, but rather a kind of conciliation or meditation mechanism on the state-to-state level, which has never been tested so far. Since 2015, however, Brazil has been heading towards a new type of investment arbitration based on Brazilian Arbitration Law (BAL) and the New York Convention (NYC). In this new type of arbitrations, the public administration will, in principle, be represented by its own state attorneys. The arbitration framework used by Brazilian public administration is modelled on the legal framework of Commercial Arbitration, though with some important modifications mainly serving the interest of public administration.

scholarly journals Late-Term Abortion and Medical Necessity: A Failure of Science

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 233339281984178
Author(s):  
James Studnicki
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Medical Necessity ◽  
Half Century ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Roe V Wade

Roe V. Wade (1973) placed the concept of medical necessity at the center of the public discourse on abortion. Nearly a half century later, 2 laws dealing with late-term abortion, 1 passed in New York and 1 set aside in Virginia, are an indication that the medical necessity argument regarding abortion has been rendered irrelevant. More importantly for this discussion, these laws are an indication of the failure of the US scientific and medical communities to inform this consequential topic with transparency, logical coherence, and evidence-based objectivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document