scholarly journals Section 8 orders on the public-private law divide

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-101
Author(s):  
Maebh Harding ◽  
Annika Newnham
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Pascale Chapdelaine

This chapter proposes two principles that should inform the development of copyright law and policy and of user rights. The first calls for more cohesion between copyright law, private law, and public law, and for less exceptionalism in copyright law. The second requires that the balance in copyright law be adjusted for its future application as a mediation tool between the competing interests of copyright holders, users, intermediaries, and the public. Instituting positive obligations for copyright holders in relation to users and steering freedom of contract toward the objectives of copyright law are necessary regulatory changes to rectify ongoing imbalances. The principle of technological neutrality should guide the judiciary in its application of copyright’s objective of promoting a balance in copyright law. The proposed guiding principles lead to the creation of a taxonomy and hierarchy of copyright user rights that take into account the myriad ways users experience copyright works.


Author(s):  
Robert Leckey

Through the narrow entry of property disputes between former cohabitants, this chapter aims to clarify thinking on issues crucial to philosophical examination of family law. It refracts big questions—such as what cohabitants should owe one another and the balance between choice and protection—through a legal lens of attention to institutional matters such as the roles of judges and legislatures. Canadian cases on unjust enrichment and English cases quantifying beneficial interests in a jointly owned home are examples. The chapter highlights limits on judicial law reform in the face of social change, both in substance and in the capacity to acknowledge the state's interest in intimate relationships. The chapter relativizes the focus on choice prominent in academic and policy discussions of cohabitation and highlights the character of family law, entwined with the general private law of property and obligations, as a regulatory system.


Author(s):  
Thomas W. Merrill

This chapter explores the relationship between private and public law. In civil law countries, the public-private distinction serves as an organizing principle of the entire legal system. In common law jurisdictions, the distinction is at best an implicit design principle and is used primarily as an informal device for categorizing different fields of law. Even if not explicitly recognized as an organizing principle, however, it is plausible that private and public law perform distinct functions. Private law supplies the tools that make private ordering possible—the discretionary decisions that individuals make in structuring their lives. Public law is concerned with providing public goods—broadly defined—that cannot be adequately supplied by private ordering. In the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, various schools of thought derived from utilitarianism have assimilated both private and public rights to the same general criterion of aggregate welfare analysis. This has left judges with no clear conception of the distinction between private and public law. Another problematic feature of modern legal thought is a curious inversion in which scholars who focus on fields of private law have turned increasingly to law and economics, one of the derivatives of utilitarianism, whereas scholars who concern themselves with public law are increasingly drawn to new versions of natural rights thinking, in the form of universal human rights.


Global Jurist ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rocco Alessio Albanese

Abstract This paper intends to discuss some major European legal issues by building on the critique of a certain narrow relevance of human basic needs, according to traditional Western legal conceptions of the subject as well as of the public-private divide. In particular it aims at verifying the potentiality of consumer law for rethinking the right to housing, within recent trends of European Private Law, by adopting a remedial approach. For this reason the paper analyzes three well-known cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) – namely Aziz, Sanchez Morcillo and Kušionová – as examples of this meaningful trend. Through the combination of the fairness test over contractual terms with the criteria of effectiveness and proportionality, a broader protection of right to housing is recognised even in horizontal private relationships. Art. 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFREU) could represent the constitutional reference for this new perspective. The paper also intends to show how the relevance of the basic need for housing is traced to debtor's families. CJEU's interpretative itinerary seems to start from a fairness test about contractual terms, but eventually comes to give protection to subjective situations that are even out of the domain of the contract.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (s2) ◽  
pp. 37-48
Author(s):  
Artan Spahiu

Abstract The protection of the public interest is the main principle governing the activity regulation of the administrative bodies. This activity, traditionally, has been developed through administrative acts, as an expression of the unilateral and authoritarian willpower of public authority, which creates legal consequences. The administrative act has been and remains the most important instrument for the administration bodies to accomplish their mission, but it is no longer effective. Particularly this lack of efficiency is noticed in recent years when the development of the economy and the needs of the evergrowing society have prompted the administration to adapt its activity by making use of other mechanisms “borrowed” from private law. An important part of public activity can also be achieved through the contract as a way that brings the state closer to the private, mitigating its dominant position and leaving space for the efficiency of private activity to fulfil public engagements. Such contracts today are known as “administrative contracts” or “public contracts”. The terms mentioned above are instruments that establish legal relations, for the regulation of which the principle of public interest is opposed and competes with the principle of freedom of the contractual willpower. The regulation of these types of contracts is reached through the private law, which constitutes the general normative framework of contracts (lex generalis) even for the administrative contracts. But this general arrangement will have effect for as long as it does not contradict the imperative provisions of the specific act of public law (lex specialis), which regulates the administrative procedure for the completion of these contracts. This paper aims to bring to the spotlight the way our legislation predict and regulates administrative contracts, by emphasising particularly the features of their dualistic nature. The coexistence and competition of the principles of the freedom of contractual willpower and the protection of the public interest, evidenced in administrative contracts, is presented in this paper through the legal analysis of the Albanian legal framework which regulates these contracts. Under the terms when the role of the state in providing public services tends to increase and our legislation aims the harmonization in accord with the European legislation, it is necessary to improve the administrative contract regulation and extend its scope of action.


2017 ◽  
pp. 119-134
Author(s):  
Wojciech Fill

The legal-financial status of the Agricultural Property Agency is complex. Rights and obligations of the financial nature of the public are interspersed with numerous powers and duties of the sphere of private law. Specific elements shaping financial status Agency are organizational relationship and the capital of other legal entities, including primarily with the Treasury and the companies controlled by the Agency. They occur in the context of normative pass Agency to the public finance sector and its companies to the category of public sector entities. In view of the takeover by the executive agencies, a significant part of the tasks previously performed by the state without legal personality, budgetary establishments, precisely in this area normative appeared completely unique opportunity to examine the impact of the construction of legal personality to changes in the shape of subjectivity.


1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (22) ◽  
pp. 1359-1359
Author(s):  
Susan Luke
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document