scholarly journals Zakaz missellingu jako przykład zastosowania behawioralnej koncepcji prawa?

2019 ◽  
pp. 29-48
Author(s):  
Tomasz Nieborak
Keyword(s):  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Loss Of Stability ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
The Public ◽  
Extreme Risk ◽  
Lively Debate ◽  
Informed Consumer

This article concerns the institution of misselling introduced recently to the Polish legal system. Misselling has been commonly defi ned as dishonest sale. Currently, the solution adopted by the Polish legislator applies only to fi nancial services provided by fi nancial institutions to consumers. This regulation is not extensive but it has already stirred a lively debate among the representatives of legal practice and doctrine. This article is a voice in the discussion and its purpose is to identify the public law aspect of the solutions adopted and propose certain actions to be taken at the level of the regulated and the regulating entities and which would account among other things for the new, behavioural way of perceiving a consumer as an informed subject even if not always rational. The need for the evolution of the paradigm of a rational consumer, which is a challenge for the contemporary legislator, has been dictated by the experience gained so far as well as by the changing reality. The market today off ers a range of new fi nancial instruments which while being innovative very frequently carry extreme risk. The intensive and sometimes intrusive advertising of these instruments off ered to ”rational consumers” uses diff erent persuasive marketing techniques and may in eff ect result in a potential loss of stability and security of the fi nancial market. Therefore while implementing the stabilisation narrative promoted within the European Union, legislative bodies in Member States adopt solutions like misselling which are intended to reduce at least partly the risk of another crisis in the fi nancial sector. Its sources go back to the conception of homo oeconomicus, that is a rational consumer who based on the information provided is capable of making a rational decision that is best for him. However, as experience and history show, this attitude is too idealistic and needs being redefi ned. Developing an optimal conception of an informed consumer requires an interdisciplinary approach which apart from the legal and economic elements will take into account the experiences of other branches of science, such as sociology or psychology as well.

Six Dimensions of Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 399-430
Author(s):  
Paul Craig
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Six Dimensions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Way

This chapter draws on the six dimensions of public law covered in the book: theory, institutions and accountability, constitutions and rights, process and procedure, legislation, and case law. It links discussion of these dimensions, by considering how they have been affected by Brexit. The chapter is not concerned with the contending arguments for leaving or remaining in the European Union. The focus is on the way in which Brexit has ‘pressure-tested’ the public law regime in the United Kingdom and the European Union. The six dimensions of public law that are discussed in the preceding chapters form the architectural frame through which the impact of Brexit on the public law regimes is assessed in both the United Kingdom and the European Union.

User Property, User Rights, and User Privileges

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pascale Chapdelaine
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Competing Interests ◽  
Regulatory Changes ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
User Property

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.

Fiduciary Principles and Public Offices

2019 ◽  
pp. 302-322
Author(s):  
Ethan J. Leib ◽  
Stephen R. Galoob
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Public Office ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Normative Structure ◽  
The Public ◽  
Positive Law

This chapter examines how fiduciary principles apply to public offices, focusing on what it means for officeholders to comport themselves to their respective public roles appropriately. Public law institutions can operate in accordance with fiduciary norms even when they are enforced differently from the remedial mechanisms available in private fiduciary law. In the public sector, fiduciary norms are difficult to enforce directly and the fiduciary norms of public office do not overlap completely with the positive law governing public officials. Nevertheless, core fiduciary principles are at the heart of public officeholding, and public officers need to fulfill their fiduciary role obligations. This chapter first considers three areas of U.S. public law whose fiduciary character reinforces the tenet that public office is a public trust: the U.S. Constitution’s “Emoluments Clauses,” administrative law, and the law of judging. It then explores the fiduciary character of public law by looking at the deeper normative structure of public officeholding, placing emphasis on how public officeholders are constrained by the principles of loyalty, care, deliberation, conscientiousness, and robustness. It also compares the policy implications of the fiduciary view of officeholding with those of Dennis Thompson’s view before concluding with an explanation of how the application of fiduciary principles might differ between public and private law settings and how public institutions might be designed or reformed in light of fiduciary norms.

Private and Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 574-592
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Merrill
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Ordering ◽  
Public Rights ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Derivatives Of

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.

scholarly journals The Principle of Sustainable Development as the Basis for Weighing the Public Interest and Individual Interest in the Scope of the Cultural Heritage Protection Law in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 3985
Author(s):  
Adam Kozień
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Individual Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Environmental Aspect ◽  
The Public

The concept of sustainable development is widely used, especially in social, environmental and economic aspects. The principle of sustainable development was derived from the concept of sustainable development, which appears in legal terms at the international, EU, national and local levels. Today, the value of cultural heritage that should be legally protected is indicated. A problematic issue may be the clash in this respect of the public interest related to the protection of heritage with the individual interest, expressed, e.g., in the ownership of cultural heritage designates. During the research, scientific methods that are used in legal sciences were used: theoretical–legal, formal–dogmatic, historical–legal methods, as well as the method of criticism of the literature, and legal inferences were also used. The analyses were carried out on the basis of the interdisciplinary literature on the subject, as well as international, EU and national legal acts—sources of the generally applicable law. Research has shown that the interdisciplinary principle of sustainable development, especially from the perspective of the social and auxiliary environmental aspect, may be the basis for weighing public and individual interests in the area of legal protection of cultural heritage in the European Union. It was also indicated that it is possible in the situation of treating the principle of sustainable development in terms of Dworkin’s “policies” and allows its application not only at the level of European Union law (primary and secondary), but also at the national legal orders of the European Union Member States.

Within the Public-Private Divide. Right to Housing and Consumer Law in Recent European Private Law Trends

Global Jurist ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rocco Alessio Albanese
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Consumer Law ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
The Right ◽  
Protection Of Right

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.

scholarly journals Feeling Uncertainty during the Lockdown That Commenced in March 2020 in Greece

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 5105
Author(s):  
Dimitris Zavras
Keyword(s):  
Lower Class ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
International Literature ◽  
Older Individuals ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Emotional Status ◽  
Limited Health Literacy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Limited Health ◽  
The Individual

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in significant uncertainty for the global population. However, since not all population groups experience the impacts of the pandemic in the same way, the objective of this study was to identify the individual characteristics associated with the feeling of uncertainty during the lockdown that commenced in March 2020 in Greece. The study used data from the “Public Opinion in the European Union (EU) in Time of Coronavirus Crisis” survey. The sample consisted of 1050 individuals aged between 16 and 54 years. According to the analysis, which was based on a logistic regression model, the emotional status of older individuals, those who experienced income and job losses since the beginning of the pandemic, and middle-class and high-class individuals, is more likely to be described as a feeling of uncertainty. In addition, the emotional status of individuals with less concern for their own health and that of family and friends is less likely to be described as a feeling of uncertainty. Although the results related to age, income, and job losses, as regards concern for health, agree with the international literature, the limited health literacy of lower-class individuals may explain the reduced likelihood of their experiencing feelings of uncertainty. The results confirm the international literature describing several aspects of uncertainty due to the COVID-19 crisis.

The Public Form of Law: Kant on the Second-Personal Constitution of Freedom

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariel Zylberman
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Public ◽  
Relational Norm ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThe two standard interpretations of Kant’s view of the relationship between external freedom and public law make one of the terms a means for the production of the other: either public law is justified as a means to external freedom, or external freedom is justified as a means for producing a system of public law. This article defends an alternative, constitutive interpretation: public law is justified because it is partly constitutive of external freedom. The constitutive view requires conceiving of external freedom in a novel, second-personal way, that is, as an irreducibly relational norm.

Technische Universitaät Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG

2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-167
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Carstens
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Attention ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Mass Digitization

In Technische Universität Darmstadt v. Eugen Ulmer KG, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ or Court) addressed several important copyright issues stemming from a practice that continues to confound many legal practitioners and adjudicators: the mass digitization of library collections. The judgment adds to an emerging body of jurisprudence decided in the context of a trend toward greater digitization that could ultimately facilitate the development of a global, digital library. To date, the jurisprudence has largely been formed by cases challenging mass digitization that are percolating through the United States courts and have attracted international attention and criticism. The ECJ decision thus provides an important point of reference for evaluating how different jurisdictions balance the rights of authors against the public interest, as served by relevant fair use exceptions consistent with their international obligations under traditional copyright treaties, the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty, and the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) applicable to all WTO member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document