scholarly journals Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 501 K/ PDT.SUS-PHI/ 2016 Tentang Pemutusan Hubungan Kerja

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-148
Author(s):  
Sonhaji Sonhaji
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Employment Agreement ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Industrial Dispute ◽  
The Law ◽  
Case Number ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The purpose of this study is to know that the Certain Working Agreement on Oral Time is not allowed in the legislation, the Supreme Court judges consideration in deciding the case Number 501 K / Pdt.Sus-PHI / 2016 and the conformity of the decision with the law applicable in Indonesia. This study uses normative juridical method, which is analytical descriptive, with data collection method in the form of library study and supported by interview with judges. The results of the research show that First, the judge's decision is unfair to both parties litigation because the defendant is not punished to pay the wage of suspension (wage process) with emphasis on the consideration of unwritten PKWT so that by law become PKWTT. Second The process wage demands which are not accepted by the judge are contrary to the laws and regulations on employment and on the settlement of industrial relations disputes because the law requires that workers and employers continue to perform their obligations until the establishment of an Industrial Dispute Settlement Institution, including the obligation of employers to pay the wage of a suspension (wages process). So the Supreme Court Decision Number 501 K / Pdt.Sus-PHI / 2016 is less in accordance with the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia. Keywords: Oral Employment Agreement, Termination Dispute, Employment

scholarly journals KILKA UWAG DOTYCZĄCYCH POWOŁYWANIA CZŁONKÓW ZARZĄDU SPÓŁEK KAPITAŁOWYCH

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gawrysiak-Zabłocka
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Company Directors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Polish Code

SOME REMARKS ON THE APPOINTMENT OF COMPANY DIRECTORSSummaryThe article discusses selected issues concerning the appointment of company directors. In the first part the focus is on the practical application of Art. 18 of the Polish Code of Commercial Companies (Kodeks spółek handlowych, KSH), which provides that only natural persons having full legal capacity and not convicted for crimes or offences mentioned in that provision can be members of a company’s board of managers. In the light of the inconsistent rulings handed down by the Polish Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) it is not clear whether the registering court, which has information available from the National Criminal Register (Krajowy Rejestr Skazanych), may refuse to enter a resolution which has been passed at a shareholders’ meeting but is in breach of the law. In my opinion, the first premise in the ruling handed down by seven Supreme Court judges on 18 September 2013 (case III CZP 13/13) is flawed. Not only does it contradict the Supreme Court decision of 24 July 2013 (case III CNP 1/13), but also its consequences can hardly be reconciled with the consequences of the second premise. In the second part of the study I use the provision on the composition of a brokerage board to show that specific regulations may prove ineffective if they only give cursory attention to an issue, with no reference to what is stipulated by the KSH.

EKONOMI SYARIAH DAN PENYELESAIANNYA DI PENGADILAN AGAMA

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Wildana Arsyad ◽  
Edi Gunawan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Education And Training ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
Religious Courts ◽  
And Training

This study aims to provide information about procedure of dispute settlement of sharia economy in the Religious Courts. This research uses qualitative method with juridical approach. The dispute procedure of sharia economic in religious court runs in accordance with the mandate of the Law contained in article 49 to article 53 Act no. 7 years 1989, Law No. 3 year 2006, Law No. 50 of 2009 about Religious Courts. Sharia economic dispute is basically due to three things, namely because one of the parties to break the promise (wanprestasi), due to unlawful acts against the agreements agreed upon and because of coercive circumstances. Settlement of disputes is held with the aim of enforcing the law which contains the value of legal justice, the value of legal certainty, and the value of legal benefit. The settlement of the sharia economic dispute in the Religious Courts is very new, so the Supreme Court up to now still conducts education and training of sharia economic certification for all Religious Court judges.Penelitian ini  bertujuan   untuk memberikan informasi mengenai prosedur penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah di Pengadilan Agama. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif dengan pendekatan yuridis Prosedur penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah di pengadilan agama berjalan sesuai dengan amanat Undang-Undang yang tertera dalam pasal 49 sampai pasal 53 Undang-Undang No. 7 tahun 1989 jo. Undang-Undang No. 3 tahun 2006 jo.Undang-Undang No.50 tahun 2009 tentang Peradilan Agama.Sengketa ekonomi syariah pada dasarnya disebabkan karena tiga hal, yaitu karena salah satu pihak melakukan ingkar janji (wanprestasi), karena perbuatan melawan hukum terhadap perjanjian yang disepakati dan karena keadaan memaksa. Penyelesaian sengketa diadakan dengan tujuan untuk menegakan hukum yang di dalamnya mengandung nilai keadilan hukum, nilai kepastian hukum, dan nilai kemanfaatan hukum.Penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah di Pengadilan Agama merupakan hal yang sangat baru, sehingga Mahkamah Agung sampai saat ini masih melaksanakan pendidikan dan latihan sertifikasi ekonomi syariah bagi seluruh hakim Pengadilan Agama.

scholarly journals Analisis Yuridis terhadap Kasus Gugatan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum atas Ketidakabsahan Peralihan Hak Milik Benda Bergerak (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1081/K/PDT/2018)

Kosmik Hukum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Fathalya Laksana
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Analytical Research ◽  
The Law

The legal requirements are regulated in Article 1320 of the Civil Code (KUHPerdata). If the valid conditions of the promise are not fulfilled, then the law that results is that the agreement can be canceled or null and void. In the Court's practice contained in the Supreme Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018, there was a sale and purchase agreement between the Plaintiff's husband and the Defendant, the sale and purchase agreement was made by the Plaintiff's partner without the consent of the Plaintiff as his legal wife. Supreme Court Decision No. 1081K / PDT / 2018 stated that the sale and purchase agreement was invalid and null and void. Apart from that, in its decision, the Defendant's UN Supreme Court had committed an illegal act. The research method used is a normative juridical approach using secondary data obtained from literature studies, namely statutory regulations, legal theories, and the opinions of leading legal scholars. This research uses descriptive analytical research specifications that describe the regulations that are in accordance with legal theories that oversee the implementation practices of the problems under study. The data analysis method used is qualitative normative method. Based on the research results, it can be denied that the sale and purchase agreement in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018 is not legally valid. The agreement does not fulfill the validity requirements of the agreement in Article 1320 of the Civil Code, namely halal skills and causes because it violates Article 36 paragraph (2) of the Marriage Law No. 1 of 1974 resulting in the sale and purchase agreement to be null and void.Keywords: Buying and Selling, Acts against the Law, Agreement, Marriage, Collective Property

scholarly journals Problematika Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Mahkamah Agung ( Kajian Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 65 P/HUM/2018)

SASI ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Suparto Suparto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
Legal Consequence ◽  
Election Commission ◽  
Legal Implication ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The Supreme Court (MA) decided that candidates for members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) from political party administrators for the 2019 Election were still allowed, even though previously the Constitutional Court (MK) had banned it (Decision No. This conflict is due to differences in interpreting the timing of the implementation of the ongoing 2019 Election stage process. The Constitutional Court stated that the decision was enforced since the 2019 Election and this was not retroactive. Because it is still at the Provisional Candidate List (DCS) stage, so it is possible to change regulations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court considers that the Constitutional Court's decision must be enforced after the 2019 Election or apply in the future (prospective), because the stages have been running, so that changes in requirements can be made The legal implication that occurs is that there is legal uncertainty for the General Election Commission (KPU) to follow which decision. To solve this problem can be used the doctrine of validity (enforceability of norms). The existence of a hierarchy of legal products being tested and a basis for testing certainly has a legal consequence of the existence of a hierarchy of norm validity in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. When there is a conflict between the Supreme Court decision and the Constitutional Court, the verdict with the basis and object of examination in the hierarchy of laws and regulations that is higher, namely the Constitutional Court decision, has a higher validity than the Supreme Court decision. So that problems like this do not exist anymore, testing of laws and regulations should only be carried out by one institution, namely the Constitutional Court.

Hayes & Williams' Family Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Gilmore ◽  
Lisa Glennon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

Hayes and Williams’ Family Law, now in its sixth edition, provides critical and case-focused discussion of the key legislation and debates affecting adults and children. The volume takes a critical approach to the subject and includes ‘talking points’ and focused ‘discussion questions’ throughout each chapter which highlight areas of debate or controversy. The introductory chapter within this edition provides a discussion of the law’s understanding of ‘family’ and the extent to which this has changed over time, a detailed overview of the meaning of private and family life within Article 8 of the ECHR, and a discussion of the Family Justice Review and subsequent developments. Part 1 of this edition, supplemented by the ‘Latest Developments’ section, outlines the most up-to-date statistics on the incidence of marriage, civil partnerships and divorce, discusses recent case law on the validity of marriage such as Hayatleh v Mofdy [2017] EWCA Civ 70 and K v K (Nullity: Bigamous Marriage) [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam), and highlights the recent Supreme Court decision (In the Matter of an Application by Denise Brewster for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2017] 1 WLR 519) on the pension rights of unmarried cohabitants. It also considers the litigation concerning the prohibition of opposite-sex civil partnership registration from the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State for Education [2017] EWCA Civ 81 to the important decision of the Supreme Court in R (on the application of Steinfeld and Keidan) (Application) v Secretary of State for International Development (in substitution for the Home Secretary and the Education Secretary) [2018] UKSC 32. This edition also provides an in-depth discussion of the recent Supreme Court decision in Owens v Owens [2018] UKSC 41 regarding the grounds for divorce and includes discussion of Thakkar v Thakkar [2016] EWHC 2488 (Fam) on the divorce procedure. Further, this edition also considers the flurry of cases in the area of financial provision on divorce such as Waggott v Waggott [2018] EWCA Civ 722; TAB v FC (Short Marriage: Needs: Stockpiling) [2016] EWHC 3285; FF v KF [2017] EWHC 1903 (Fam); BD v FD (Financial Remedies: Needs) [2016] EWHC 594 (Fam); Juffali v Juffali [2016] EWHC 1684 (Fam); AAZ v BBZ [2016] EWHC 3234 (Fam); Scatliffe v Scatliffe [2016] UKPC 36; WM v HM [2017] EWFC 25; Hart v Hart [2017] EWCA Civ 1306; Sharp v Sharp [2017] EWCA Civ 408; Work v Gray [2017] EWCA Civ 270, and Birch v Birch [2017] UKSC 53. It also considers the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Mills v Mills [2018] UKSC 38 concerning post-divorce maintenance obligations between former partners, and the Privy Council decision in Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17 relating to the joint name purchase by a cohabiting couple of investment property.Part 2 focuses on child law, examining the law on parenthood and parental responsibility, including the parental child support obligation. This edition includes discussion of new case law on provision of child maintenance by way of global financial orders (AB v CD (Jurisdiction: Global Maintenance Orders)[2017] EWHC 3164), new case law and legislative/policy developments on section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (parental orders transferring legal parenthood in surrogacy arrangements), and new cases on removing and restricting parental responsibility (Re A and B (Children: Restrictions on Parental Responsibility: Radicalisation and Extremism) [2016] EWFC 40 and Re B and C (Change of Names: Parental Responsibility: Evidence) [2017] EWHC 3250 (Fam)). Orders regulating the exercise of parental responsibility are also examined, and this edition updates the discussion with an account of the new Practice Direction 12J (on contact and domestic abuse), and controversial case law addressing the tension between the paramountcy of the child’s welfare and the protected interests of a parent in the context of a transgender father’s application for contact with his children (Re M (Children) [2017] EWCA Civ 2164). Part 2 also examines the issue of international child abduction, including in this edition the Supreme Court’s latest decision, on the issue of repudiatory retention (Re C (Children) [2018] UKSC 8). In the public law, this edition discusses the Supreme Court’s clarification of the nature and scope of local authority accommodation under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 (Williams v London Borough of Hackney [2018] UKSC 37). In the law of adoption, several new cases involving children who have been relinquished by parents for adoption are examined (Re JL & AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption),[2016] EWHC 440 (Fam) and see also Re M and N (Twins: Relinquished Babies: Parentage) [2017] EWFC 31, Re TJ (Relinquished Baby: Sibling Contact) [2017] EWFC 6, and Re RA (Baby Relinquished for Adoption: Final Hearing)) [2016] EWFC 47).

Leading Decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel and Extracts of the Judgment

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Conditional Release ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Of Israel

Ganimat v. The State of Israel (1995) 49(iv) P.D. 589.The appellant was indicted in the Jerusalem Magistrate Court for two incidents of car theft. His detention was requested on the grounds that he posed a “danger to society”. The Magistrate Court agreed to his arrest, holding that a custom has been established whereby custody may be justified in crimes which have become “a nationwide scourge”, including car theft. The District Court rejected the appeal. The appellant was granted permission to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court (decision of Dorner J. and Barak J.; Cheshin J. dissenting) and his conditional release was ordered. However, it was decided to hold Special Proceedings in order to discuss some of the important issues raised by the case. The principal constitutional question raised by the case was whether the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty influences the interpretation of the existing law, in the present case, the law of arrest as regulated by the Law of Criminal Procedure.

scholarly journals TINJAUAN YURIDIS TERHADAP WANPRESTASI DALAM HAL HUTANG PIUTANG

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 116
Author(s):  
Jon Hendri ◽  
Khoiri Khoiri
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Consideration ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Source Data ◽  
The Law ◽  
Case Number ◽  
Legal Procedures

Kaselan S.Hut has lent money to Abdul Wahid bin Kosmol with the amount of money of Rp. 162,000,000. But abdul wahid bin kosmol wanprestasi until finally to the court but in the trial, the “majelis hakim”  did not consider the willingness shown by abdul Wahid to pay off the debts to kaselan. The problem of the study was how the judges’s  legal considerations in deciding cases Number 1372 K / PDT / 2008 and how about a way to prove the case Number 1372 K / PDT / 2008. Furthermore, the method of this journal was the type of normative research, the source data obtained from three parts of Primary Legal Material, the decision of the Supreme Court and the “Perdata" case No. 1372 K / PDT / 2008, secondary law materials from books and “hukum tersier”. From the results, its can be explained that the “majelis hakim mahkamah agung” in conducting examination of cases Number 1372 K / PDT / 2008 has been through legal procedures as defined by the law. However, in giving legal consideration in deciding the judgment only based on the validity of the agreement made by both parties, regardless of the "eksepsi" filed by the defendant, because the defendant also has good willingness and proven by the payment of the debt in several times. In reviewing the instruments of evidence the “majelis hakim mahkamah agung” only concerns for the evidence presented by the plaintiff, whereas the witness evidence presented by the defendant is not a part of assessment of the “majelis hakim”.

scholarly journals Examine The Constitutionality Of Regulations Under Laws That Are Not Contrary To The Law But Contrary To The Constitution

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-113
Author(s):  
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan ◽  
I Putu Eka Cakra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Kewenangan untuk memeriksa UU terhadap Konstitusi dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan pengujian hukum dan peraturan berdasarkan Undang-Undang tentang Hukum dilaksanakan oleh Mahkamah Agung sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 24 A paragraf 1 dan 24 C paragraf 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Namun, dalam perumusan pasal a quo ternyata masih menyisakan masalah, yaitu belum mengatur mekanisme pengujian norma yang terkandung dalam undang-undang di bawah undang-undang jika ternyata tidak bertentangan dengan undang-undang tetapi bertentangan dengan konstitusi. Tulisan ini membahas pengujian norma-norma undang-undang melalui Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 tentang kewenangan peradilan di casu a quo pasal 24 A ayat 1 dan 24 C ayat 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Kata kunci: otoritas, hukum, konstitusi. Abstract The authority to examine the Law against the Constitution is carried out by the Constitutional Court and the testing of the laws and regulations under the Law on the Law is carried out by the Supreme Court as regulated in article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. However, in the formulation of the article a quo it turns out still leaves a problem, namely not yet regulating the norm testing mechanism contained in the legislation under the legislation if it turns out it is not contrary to the law but contrary to the constitution. This paper analyzes the testing of the norms of the legislation through the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Republic IX concerning judicial authority in casu a quo article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Keyword: authority, law, the constitution.

scholarly journals PENGATURAN TENTANG PENYELESAIAN KONFLIK NORMA ANTARA PERATURAN MENTERI TERHADAP UNDANG-UNDANG

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 1191
Author(s):  
Maria Virginia Usfunan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaturan tentang penyelesaian tentang konflik norma antara peraturan menteri terhadap undang-undang dan unruk mengetahui bagaimana sifat putusan mahkamah agung dalam hak uji material. Metode yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konsep. Pengaturan tentang penyelesaian konflik norma antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, metode penyelesaian konflik norma itu dengan digunakannya asas lex superior derogate lex inferior ini, yang digunakan dengan terjadinya konflik norma antara UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dengan Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 terkait pengaturan penyelesaian konflik norma antara peraturan menteri dengan Undang-Undang, maka berdasarkan asas tersebut yang digunakan adalah UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, sehingga Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 harus dikesampingkan. Maka, Pengaturan mengenai Penyelesaian Konflik Norma Antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, menjadi kewenangan Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan Pasal 9 UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Dan Sifat Putusan Mahkamah Agung dalam Hak Uji Materiil dalam memberikan putusannya yang pada prinsipnya yang memiliki konsekuensi hukum aturan tersebut apabila terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bertentangan dengan aturan di atasnya maka aturan tersebut akan menjadi tidak sah serta tidak berlaku, dan menjadi tanggungjawab instansi terkait untuk mencabutnya. The purpose of the study is to find how adjustment of the settlement of norm conflicts between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution and to find out how the nature of the Supreme Court decision in the right of judicial review. The method used was normative legal research method with the legislation approach and concept approach. Adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution, the method of resolving norms conflicts by using the principle of lex superior derogate lex inferior, which was used in the norm conflicts between the Constitution on Laws and Regulations with Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 in relation to conflict resolution arrangements the norm between Ministerial Regulations and the Constitution, then based on the principle used was the Constitution on Laws and Regulations, so Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 must be set aside. Thus, the adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution became authority of the Supreme Court based on Article 9 of the Constitution on Laws and Regulations. And the nature of the Supreme Court's Decision in the Right to Judge Material in providing its decision which in principle had legal consequences of the rule if it was proven legally and convincingly contrary to the rules above, the rule would be invalid and not applicable, and it was the responsibility of related agencies to revoke it.

scholarly journals Legal Protection For Brand Right Owner Famous For His Brand Immediate

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-229
Author(s):  
Chris Anggi Natalia Berutu ◽  
Sheila Elfira ◽  
Monica Sheren Tambuwun ◽  
Ericson Sebastian Sitohang
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Existing Data

Brand equality can cause harm to brand owners. Therefore, the legal protection of trademarks is very important. In this study, the authors will analyze the Supreme Court Decision No. 7K/pdt.sus-HKI/2016 whose purpose is that the consequences of the law of imitation of famous brands can be known and know the legal protection for owners of well-known brands if their brands are imitated. This research is descriptive and classified as normative legal research and uses existing data. Based on research, the famous brand ST. REGIS belonging to the plaintiff entered the list of registrants in Indonesia first, therefore the defendant's mark REGIS@the Peak at Sudirman has been registered with unfavorable conditions. The defendant's mark is essentially the same as the plaintiff's mark for similar and dissimilar services, as a result, the defendant's mark must be removed from the general register of marks. According to the law, Sheraton Internasional as the owner of the famous ST.REGIS brand won against REGIS@ the Peak at Sudirman.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document