scholarly journals Voluntary Approaches to Transitioning from Competitive Fisheries to Rights-Based Management: Bringing the Field into the Lab

2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Knapp ◽  
James J. Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Total Catch ◽  
Total Allowable Catch ◽  
Rent Dissipation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Voluntary Approaches ◽  
A Share

This paper describes a novel experiment designed to examine how rent dissipation may occur in fisheries in which the right to participate is limited and fishermen compete amongst themselves for shares of an exogenous total allowable catch. We demonstrate that rent dissipation may occur through multiple mechanisms, and that the heterogeneity of fishermen has important implications for how rent dissipation occurs and the extent to which different individuals may benefit from the implementation of rights-based management. We apply this approach to investigate the concept of voluntary rights-based management under which managers divide the total allowable catch between two separate fisheries, and fishermen may choose between fishing for a guaranteed individual harvest quota and competing for a share of the total catch in a competitive fishery.

scholarly journals Legal status of the company's share in own authorized capital under the Law of Ukraine “On limited and additional liability companies”: problems of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11/1 (-) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Volodymyr TSIUPRYK
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Company ◽  
Authorized Capital ◽  
A Share

Introduction. Nowadays, the issue of determining the legal status of the company's share in the own authorized capital of LLC and TDV has become quite acute, as evidenced by the adoption on July 28, 2021 by the Commercial Court of Cassation in Case № 904/1112/20, in which the Court established a new approach legal nature of such a phenomenon and expressed his own position on the understanding of the legislation concerning the legal status of the share of LLC and TDV in its own authorized capital. Given that a limited liability company is the most popular type of legal entity that is chosen to conduct business in Ukraine, the analysis of this issue is relevant. Some scientific value for the development of the transfer of the participant's share are the works of individual authors devoted to the study of the legal nature of the share in the authorized capital but the problems arising around the legal status of the company. in their own authorized capital in these works were only mentioned along with others, but did not receive a detailed separate study. The purpose of the paper is to analyze the normative regulation of the legal status of the company's share in the own authorized capital of LLCs and ALCs, identification of shortcomings in their legal regulation and implementation, as well as the search for ways to eliminate them. Results. One of the most relevant decisions concerning the subject of this article is the Judgment of the Commercial Court of Cassation in case № 904/1112/20 of July 28, 2021. The court in this case found that the votes attributable to the share belonging to the company itself are not taken into account when determining the results of voting at the general meeting of participants on any issues. However, Ukrainian legislation does not contain any direct norms that would prohibit the exercise of the right to manage a company in relation to itself on the basis of a share in its own authorized capital. That is why the company cannot be a participant in relation to itself, although they seem logical, but do not have sufficient regulatory support, and therefore do not allow to be firmly convinced of their compliance with the law. In view of this, it can be stated that there is a significant gap in the national legislation on this issue, which, in our opinion, the Court failed to “fill” with this decision in the case. Conclusion. In the Ukrainian legislation at the level of the Law of Ukraine “On Limited and Additional Liability Companies” Article 25 defines the possibility for a company to acquire a share in its own authorized capital. However, the regulation of the legal status of such a share cannot be called sufficient, due to which in practice there are certain problems in the implementation of the provisions of the legislation concerning the share of the company in its own authorized capital. The solution of these legal problems is necessary to ensure the highest quality and clarity of the law, as well as to form case law with common approaches to understanding a single rule.

scholarly journals The Recovery of Dowry in Roman Law

1985 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane F. Gardner
Keyword(s):  
Recent Article ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Broad Agreement ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Share

The recent article by R. P. Saller on Roman dowry in the Principate makes some interesting and important suggestions about the function of dowry and its role in the devolution of property. I am in broad agreement with a good deal of what he says, and would not dispute his views that dowry was, as shown by the requirement of collatio dotis, regarded as in a sense part of a woman's patrimony, and that the rules for the recovery of dowry show that the purpose of giving dowry was not held to rest on one single principle, but included provision both for the expenses of the wife's maintenance during marriage and for a possible remarriage after divorce or widowhood. However, his remarks on both points need some qualification and amplification. Briefly, I hope to show (i) that the oddities and anomalies noticed by Saller in the rules governing the recovery of dowry at the end of a marriage are apparent rather than real, since these rules rest, not on conflicting views about the purpose of dowry, but on the fact that the husband had full legal ownership of the dowry during marriage, together with the right of the wife or her pater to an actio rei uxoriae for recovery of dowry; (ii) that the rules for collatio dotis applied only if the woman herself chose to claim a share in her father's estate on intestacy beyond the amount of her dowry; (iii) that the use of the dowry for the wife's support was an equitable, rather than a legal, requirement.

scholarly journals “The Great End of All Government…”: Working People's Construction of Citizenship Claims in Early Nineteenth-Century England and the Matter of Class

1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (S3) ◽  
pp. 19-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc W. Steinberg
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Manual Labour ◽  
Working People ◽  
Parliamentary Reform ◽  
The Right ◽  
William Cobbett ◽  
A Share

In the heat of the battle for parliamentary reform William Cobbett preached to the working people of England in his inimitable blustery dictums. “[I]f you labour honestly,” he counselled, “you have a right to have, in exchange for your labour, a sufficiency out of the produce of the earth, to maintain yourself and your family as well; and, if you are unable to labour, or if you cannot obtain labour, you have a right to maintenance out of the produce of the land […]”. For honest working men this was part of the legacy of constitutional Britain, which bequeathed to them not only sustenance but, “The greatest right […] of every man, the right of rights, […] the right of having a share in the making of the laws, to which the good of the whole makes it his duty to submit”. Nonetheless, he warned, such rights could not legitimately negate the toiling lot that was the laborer's fate: “Remember that poverty is decreed by the very nature of man […]. It is necessary to the existence of mankind, that a very large proportion of every people should live by manual labour […]”.

Grain Taxes in British Ceylon, 1832–1878: Problems in the Field

1968 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 809-834
Author(s):  
Michael W. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Fourteenth Century ◽  
Caste System ◽  
Paddy Fields ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Agricultural Income ◽  
Private Rights ◽  
Indian Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Village ◽  
A Share

Ancient Sinhalese rulers had a right to a share of agricultural income, a right which embraced the produce of the land as well as irrigation rates and was generally paid in kind. In effect, there was a land tax; but the term used (bojika-, bojiya-, or bojaka-pati) was more than mere land tax and connotes a tax on income corresponding to bhaga in Indian law books. By the fourteenth century, if not earlier, there had been a fundamental change. Rather than a tithe from each class of land in the village, the king received the whole of the produce of certain fields, the muttettu, which were cultivated gratis by the villagers who possessed other fields either in return for this service or in recognition of the king's suzreignty. This meant that there were no intermediaries farming (renting) the right to collect the tithe. It also meant that the villager held his paddy fields on an individual and hereditary (paraveny) basis. There was, however, no concept of freehold ownership. Authority was political. One could not distinguish private rights from political allegiance. Landholders combined rights in land with duties to the king. Service was attached to the land and was obligatory to any transferee. In some cases, this service was rendered to the king's chiefs and nominees or to the temples, for the kings distributed largesse in the form of lands and the services attached to them; these were known as nindagam, viharegam or devalegam as distinct from the king's villages, the gabadagam; such recipients were more like feudal overlords than farmers of the revenue. In other cases, villagers of certain castes performed certain specified services for the king, for other castes (usually higher castes) in their village, or for neighboring villages, and in return enjoyed certain fields. It was a system of service tenure that was girded and threaded by the caste system.

Stock Exchange Options.

1960 ◽  
Vol 16 (01) ◽  
pp. 40-47
Author(s):  
J. G. Day
Keyword(s):  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Common Type ◽  
Current Price ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exchange Options ◽  
Right To Buy ◽  
A Share

The best known and most common type of option is that where an investor pays money (option money) for the call—that is for the right to buy shares at the current price in 3 months time.This is best explained by an example. Suppose shareAstands at 50s. (market price 49s. 10½d.–50s. 1½d.) and the option rate is 4s.Then the investor pays:Option money 4s.Commission (as for buying a share at 50s. 1½d.)This payment gives him the right to buy the share at the ‘striking price’ on any ‘declaration day’ within the term of the option.

scholarly journals Quota in the Field: "My Lady Take Your Place."

1970 ◽  
pp. 45-46
Author(s):  
Hind Soufi Hassaf
Keyword(s):  
The Political ◽  
Quota System ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
A Share

Under this title, Hind Soufi Assaf conducted a study aimed at identifying the impact of the quota system on different categories of Lebanese society and the possibility of implementing the right to a "share" in the political domain. It also sheds light on the problems likely to result from the introduction of such a procedure.

scholarly journals MODEL PENGENDALIAN OUTPUT PENANGKAPAN UNTUK PENYESUAIAN TERHADAP KUOTA NASIONAL TUNA SIRIP BIRU SELATAN

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Purwanto Purwanto ◽  
Lilis Sadiyah ◽  
Fayakun Satria
Keyword(s):  
Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Corrective Action ◽  
Total Catch ◽  
Total Allowable Catch ◽  
Output Control ◽  
Control Rules ◽  
Management Measure ◽  
Southern Bluefin Tuna ◽  
One Year ◽  
Tuna Fishery

<p>Pengelolaan perikanan tuna sirip biru selatan (SBT) dilakukan oleh Komisi Konservasi Tuna Sirip Biru Selatan (CCSBT) dengan pengendalian output melalui penetapan jumlah tangkapan yang diperbolehkan (JTB). Untuk tahun 2015 – 2017, Indonesia menerima alokasi JTB sebesar 750 ton SBT per tahun. Dalam pemanfaatan kuota tersebut, bila total hasil tangkapan SBT dalam satu tahun lebih rendah dari kuota, maka sisa kuota hanya dapat dimanfaatkan tahun berikutnya dan tidak boleh melebihi 20% dari sisa kuota. Sebaliknya, bila total hasil tangkapan SBT dalam satu tahun melebihi kuota, CCSBT dapat mengenakan tindakan korektif, berupa antara lain pengembalian kelebihan tangkapan dan pengurangan kuota nasional pada tahun berikutnya. Capaian pemanfaatan kuota nasional SBT ditentukan oleh hasil tangkapan masing-masing kapal. Mengingat hasil tangkapan masing-masing kapal terkadang tidak sesuai dengan kuotanya walaupun hasil tangkapan nasional sesuai dengan kuota nasional, Indonesia perlu melakukan pengendalian output masing-masing kapal. Untuk mendukung upaya pengendalian tersebut perlu disusun kaidah pengendaliannya. Kaidah tersebut disajikan dalam tulisan ini.</p><p> </p><p>Management of southern bluefin tuna fishery (SBT) is conducted by the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) using output control through the total allowable catch (TAC). Indonesia will receive an allocation of 750 tonnes of SBT per year, for the years 2015 - 2017. In the utilization of the quota, if the total catch of SBT in one year is lower than the quota, then the remaining quota can only be used next year and must not exceed 20% of the remaining quota. Conversely, if the total catch of SBT in a year exceeds the quota, CCSBT may impose corrective action, such as, among others, the return of excess catch and national quota reduction in the following year. The achievement of national quota utilization of SBT is determined by the catch of each vessel. In view of the catch of each vessel may not comply each vessel’s quota although the national catches do not exceed the national quota, Indonesia needs to implement an output control of each vessel. To support this management measure, control rules need to be developed. The rules are presented in this paper.</p>

The “Lost Mackerel” of the North East Atlantic—The Flawed System of Trilateral and Bilateral Decision-making

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Ørebech
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
East Atlantic ◽  
Total Allowable Catch ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Atlantic Mackerel ◽  
North East ◽  
The North ◽  
Quota Allocation ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Right

Abstract The North East Atlantic mackerel is moving westward and northward. How to integrate new coastal states whose Exclusive Economic Zone is invaded by mackerel into existing decision-making processes? The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, the 1995 Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement, the 1980 North East Atlantic Fisheries Convention, and bilateral and trilateral agreements between “relevant coastal states” fail to provide rules for present decision-makers to incorporate newcomers. The present harvesting states are sovereign with regard to admitting or refusing newcomers. This article argues for a stricter obligation on coastal states to acknowledge the right of new harvesting nations to access decision-making processes for estimating total allowable catch and allocating quotas. Equitable distribution can occur if quota allocation is subject to principles that are less discretionary than the present ones. One solution is to estimate the ratio of biomass related to the share of coastal states in the distribution of eggs, larvae and fishable stock, and allocate a quota to each coastal and high seas fishing state accordingly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document