scholarly journals Kibernetinis persekiojimas (cyberstalking): viktimizacijos ypatumai ir teisinio reagavimo galimybės

2021 ◽  
pp. 235-257
Author(s):  
Gabija Panomariovaitė ◽  
Justina Zokaitė
Keyword(s):  
Legal Response

In the article, the phenomenon of cyberstalking is presented through the differentiation from convenient stalking (stalking without the usage of cyberspace). Moreover, cyberstalkers and their victims are characterised by distinguishing their prevalent features and interaction. Authors discuss national as well as international measures of legal response to cyberstalking crimes.

Spain: Legal Response to Covid-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Utrilla Dolores ◽  
García-Muñoz Manuel Antonio ◽  
Sánchez Teresa Pareja
Keyword(s):  
Legal Response

Pseudo-Restitutionary Damages: Some Thoughts on the Dual Theory of Restitution for Wrongs

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Giglio
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Corrective Justice ◽  
Dual Theory ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
First Case ◽  
The Law ◽  
Compensatory Damages ◽  
Single Response

Restitution for civil wrongs, also known as restitutionary damages, is a legal response through which the defendant’s wrongful gain is awarded to the claimant. James Edelman has recently advocated two different restitutionary responses for wrongs. One response, termed ‘restitutionary damages’, would aim to compel the wrongdoer to give back to the victim a wrongful gain, whereas the other response, ‘disgorgement damages’, would oblige the wrongdoer to give up a wrongful gain for the benefit of the claimant.In the first case, the claimant would obtain what should have never left his assets. In the second case, the claimant would be the beneficiary of a judicial decision according to which a wrongful gain should not be kept by the wrongdoer. In this essay, I seek to demonstrate that this taxonomy cannot be accepted. I argue that Edelman’s ‘disgorgement damages’ are the only true example of restitution for wrongs, whereas his ’restitutionary damages’ are simply compensatory damages which are quantified in a particular fashion. Edelman’s ‘restitutionary damages’ might appear to deprive the defendant of his gain, and thus to achieve a restitutionary goal. Yet they nullify the victim’s loss and therefore have a compensatory nature. They are ‘pseudo-restitutionary damages’. In opposition to the dual theory, I submit a model of restitutionary damages based upon a single response which is coherent with the tenets of corrective justice. Given that it deals mainly with Edelman’s ‘restitutionary damages’, this article is not so much about restitution for wrongs but rather about compensation, which is what Edelman’s ‘restitutionary damages’ really concerns. The theory which I propose, based upon a single restitutionary response for wrongs, solves the taxonomic incoherence of Edelman’s dual theory. It also reflects the law as we find it, being supportable by reference to the available judicial authorities.

Justice as a Tertiary Prevention Strategy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leigh Goodmark
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Tertiary Prevention ◽  
Prevention Strategy ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Legal System

This chapter addresses the question, what is justice, in the context of intimate partner violence (IPV) and examines the use of law and the legal system for the prevention of IPV revictimization (tertiary prevention). The chapter highlights the limitations of the law and criminal legal system for achieving justice for specific groups of IPV survivors, and the potential for this system cause further harm. The chapter considers alternatives to the traditional criminal legal response to IPV to secure justice and safety for IPV survivors.

Violence against women: The international legal response

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin
Keyword(s):  
Violence Against Women ◽  
Legal Response
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document