Scaling Court Decisions with Citation Networks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Arnold ◽  
Benjamin Engst ◽  
Thomas Gschwend
Keyword(s):  
Court Decisions ◽  
Citation Networks

The Eleventh Circuit Holds that Agreements in which Pharmaceutical Companies Pay Generic Companies Not to Compete May be Valid

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-184
Author(s):  
Amy Garrigues
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Trial Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Appeals Court ◽  
Two Sides

On September 15, 2003, the US. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that agreements between pharmaceutical and generic companies not to compete are not per se unlawful if these agreements do not expand the existing exclusionary right of a patent. The Valley DrugCo.v.Geneva Pharmaceuticals decision emphasizes that the nature of a patent gives the patent holder exclusive rights, and if an agreement merely confirms that exclusivity, then it is not per se unlawful. With this holding, the appeals court reversed the decision of the trial court, which held that agreements under which competitors are paid to stay out of the market are per se violations of the antitrust laws. An examination of the Valley Drugtrial and appeals court decisions sheds light on the two sides of an emerging legal debate concerning the validity of pay-not-to-compete agreements, and more broadly, on the appropriate balance between the seemingly competing interests of patent and antitrust laws.

MENIMBANG PRINSIP ”DUTY OF CARE”: ‘PEMBELI’ MELAWAN ‘PEMBELI’ DALAM SENGKETA JUAL BELI TANAH

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
Widodo Dwi Putro ◽  
Ahmad Zuhairi
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Physical Data ◽  
Agrarian Law ◽  
Land Sale

ABSTRAKSengketa jual beli tanah dalam perkara ini menyeret pihak penjual yang telah menjual objek yang sama kepada dua pembeli dalam dua kali transaksi. Pembeli kedua (penggugat) melayangkan gugatannya terhadap pembeli pertama (tergugat II). Posisi hukumnya dilematis. Kedua pembeli sama-sama merasa mempunyai hak atas tanah sengketa karena telah membeli objek yang sama dari penjual. Untuk membuktikan siapa pembeli yang berhak, hakim perlu mempertimbangkan asas "iktikad baik" (good faith), sebagai dasar untuk menentukan pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum. Permasalahannya, kedua pembeli sama-sama mengklaim dirinya adalah pembeli yang beriktikad baik. Sehingga, untuk menilai siapa pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum, hakim berpegangan pada prinsip duty of care, dengan mempertimbangkan siapa pembeli yang berhati-hati dan cermat memeriksa data yuridis dan data fisik sebelum dan saat jual beli dilakukan. Prinsip duty of care ini bersifat abstrak, maka metode penulisan yang digunakan, menelusuri dan mengkaji pendapat para ahli hukum perdata dan agraria untuk didialogkan dengan putusan-putusan hakim. Perkembangan putusan-putusan pengadilan mengenai pembeli beriktikad baik yang mengadopsi prinsip duty of care, seharusnya menjadi 'pegangan' para hakim dalam menangani kasus yang serupa, untuk menilai kapan pembeli dikategorikan sebagai pembeli beriktikad baik.Kata kunci: iktikad baik, perlindungan hukum, duty of care, data yuridis dan fisik.ABSTRACTThe dispute of land sale and purchase in this case drag the seller who had sold the same object to two buyers in two transactions. The second buyer (plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the first buyer (defendant II). Its legal standing created a dilemma. Both buyers felt equally entitled to be the owner of the disputed land, which is the same object purchased from the seller. In providing evidence of the most eligible buyer, the judge should take into consideration the principle of "good faith" as the basis for determining the buyer deserving legal protection. The problem is that both buyers claimed that they were buyers of good faith. Therefore, to appraise which buyer deserving the legal protection, the judges adhered to principle of "duty of care" by taking into account which one of them was carefully and meticulously reading-through the juridical and physical data prior to and during the sale and purchase of the land was conducted. Given the abstract nature of the principle of "duty of care" the analysis method used in this discussion is exploring and studying the opinions of the experts of civil and agrarian law as to be juxtaposed with the decisions of the judges. The development of court decisions related to the issue of good faith buyers adopting the principle of "duty of care" should serve as a reference for the judges in handling similar cases to determine a good faith buyer.Keywords: good faith, legal protection, duty of care, juridical and physical data.

Properties of Court Decisions and the Mechanism of Their Adoption in Criminal Proceedings

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
V.I. Kachalov ◽  
M.V. Belyaev ◽  
O.V. Kachalova ◽  
E.V. Markovicheva
Keyword(s):  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings

PRINCIPLES OF STATE REGULATION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF BODIES OF THE STATE EXECUTIVE SERVICE AND PRIVATE EXECUTORS

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
pp. 69-77
Author(s):  
Mariіa Konstantinovna Kulava
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Executive System ◽  
The Right

Within the presented article, taking into account already existing achievements of scientists, the concept, the main features of the principles of state administration of the executive system of Ukraine are defined. The principles of activity of executive bodies bodies according to the current legislation of Ukraine are determined. A brief description of the principles is presented, namely: the rule of law, legality, compulsory, independence, justice, impartiality and objectivity, discretion, transparency and openness of executive proceedings and its fixation by technical means, the reasonableness of the time limits for enforcement proceedings, the proportionality of enforcement measures and the amount of claims for decisions, the right to appeal decisions, actions or omissions of state executives, private performers. It is established that in general the principles of executive proceedings in the investigated normative acts are duplicated, in addition to the principles of independence and the right to appeal decisions, actions or inaction of state executives, private performers. The actual vision of the principles of public administration of the executive system of Ukraine is determined. The opinion on the need to supplement the list of principles with the following: the principle of equal competition between state and private performers through the balance between them; the principle of responsibility of the executive system bodies, their officials and private executors for damage caused as a result of violations of regulatory requirements; the principle of introducing effective incentives for voluntary implementation of decisions; the principle of professionalism and competence. Also, within the submitted article, it is stated that the use of the terms “principles” and “principles” in the Laws of Ukraine “On Bodies and Officials Performing Enforcement of Court Decisions and Decisions of Other Bodies”, “On Enforcement Proceedings”, which are adopted simultaneously and regulated, are unjustified, identical social relations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document