scholarly journals Global Justice: Why not State jurisdictions in transnational financial disputes?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1483-1547
Author(s):  
Alejandro Gabriel Manzo
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Trial Judges ◽  
Debt Market ◽  
Argumentative Strategies ◽  
Reform Processes

Abstract The article brings the debate about Global Justice to the centre stage of the Sovereign Debt Restructuring (SDRs) field. The judicial system that intervenes in sovereign debt conflicts was not on the agenda of the last reform processes activated in this field. In the NML Capital vs. Argentina (NML) trial, judges from different instances and different jurisdictions issued declarations of the same dimensions related to the same object of litigation. The article makes a comparative analysis of the argumentative strategies that judges used at the time of justifying their positions in order to show the tensions in which they incurred. It is explained that: a) these tensions are the result of agents -the judges- that must take decisions in a context of crossroads where the expected option in accordance with usual legal practices would undermine their own position in the field of sovereign debt market; b) these crossroads are rooted in the structural limits of the judicial system in which these agents operate. Contrary to what official statements postulate, it is argued that these limits conspire against the possibility that state courts provide Justice in transnational disputes, in which they must judge another equally sovereign State.

Financial Systems and economic Development in the Russian Regions: A Comparative Analysis

2015 ◽  
pp. 94-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Krinichansky
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Financial Development ◽  
Public Debt ◽  
Fixed Capital ◽  
Russian Regions ◽  
Growth Mechanisms ◽  
Financial Systems ◽  
Debt Market ◽  
Regions Of Russia

The paper identifies and assesses the closeness of the connection between incremental indicators of the financial development in the regions of Russia with the incremental regional GDP and the investment in fixed capital. It is shown that the positioning of the region as an independent participant of public debt market matters: the regional GDP and investment in fixed capital grow more rapidly in the regions which are regularly borrowing on the sub-federal bonds market. The paper also demonstrates that the poorly developed financial system in some regions have caused the imperfection of the growth mechanisms since the economy is not able to use the financial system’s functions.

scholarly journals Will the Sovereign Debt Market Survive?

2003 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei Shleifer
Keyword(s):  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
Debt Market

scholarly journals The Market Reaction to Legal Shocks and Their Antidotes: Lessons from the Sovereign Debt Market

2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 289-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bradley ◽  
James D. Cox ◽  
Mitu Gulati
Keyword(s):  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
Market Reaction ◽  
Debt Market

European Court of Human Rights and the Bulgarian Judicial System

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 535-544
Author(s):  
Aleksandur Kirkov ◽  
◽  
Ana Andonova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court

Bulgaria ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1992, as such this European act has become part of our domestic legislation. Explaining in detail the differences and similarities between the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the Bulgarian judicial system, we will actually see how much they are similar. This is the purpose of the present study - comparative analysis in all aspects: territorial jurisdiction, legal jurisdiction, including procedurally legitimate persons to file complaints, procedural issues, stages of the process, court decisions and appeals. The first and most important task of the study is to get acquainted in detail with our European rights, as well as their judicial protection. On the other hand, the knowledge of the European judicial mechanisms leads to the expansion of our national horizons in a supranational perspective, to opportunities for professional realization outside the borders of the country, on a European and global scale. The research method used in the present scientific work is the comparative analysis. The methodology we refer to in preparing the analysis is based on a predetermined methodological approach and structure in conducting the analysis. The methodological approach itself includes a general overview of the legal framework, regulating the administration of justice in national courts and at European level. An essential feature of the approach used is to compare the two established legal systems, at home and in Strasbourg, at all levels, to explore links and interdependencies possible differences. Expected results: acquainting the Bulgarians with their European rights, as in case of violation of these rights, learning about the mechanisms for their protection in court. Conclusions and summaries: Bulgaria is part of the common European framework. As such, its citizens are Bulgarians, but also Europeans. Namely, as Europeans, they have rights that are guaranteed to them by Europe and that should be respected in Bulgaria. Failure to respect these European rights creates conflicts that should be resolved by both national courts and the European Court of Human Rights.

Part VI Federalism, Ch.36 Federal Jurisdiction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stellios James
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Federal System ◽  
High Court ◽  
System P ◽  
Judicial Federalism ◽  
Federal Jurisdiction

This chapter identifies the origins, content, and operation of federal jurisdiction in Australia. In the United States the creation of federal jurisdiction was the necessary concomitant of the establishment of the judicial arm of federal government. The same could not be said of the conditions for Australian federalism. Federalism Australian-style did not require a federal system of courts. Further complicating the issue was the ‘autochthonous expedient’: the facility provided to Parliament for the use of State courts to exercise federal jurisdiction. Hence the chapter also seeks to suggest that the discordance between the concept and purpose of federal jurisdiction left the High Court with the challenging task of conceptualizing ‘judicial federalism’. In executing that task, High Court jurisprudence has presented differing conceptions of the place of State courts within the federal judicial system.

An Experimental Investigation of How Judicial Elections Affect Public Faith in the Judicial System

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (01) ◽  
pp. 37-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Nownes ◽  
Colin Glennon
Keyword(s):  
Selection Method ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
State Courts ◽  
State Court ◽  
Selection Methods ◽  
Institutional Legitimacy ◽  
Judicial Elections ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
The Impact

Judicial scholars have often speculated about the impact of elections on the administration of justice in the state courts. Yet relatively little research has concerned itself with public perceptions of state court selection methods. Of particular interest is the concept of legitimacy. Do elections negatively affect public perceptions of judicial legitimacy? Bonneau and Hall (2009) and Gibson (2012) answer this question with an emphatic “No.” Judicial elections, these studies show, are not uniquely troublesome for perceptions of institutional legitimacy. This article aims to extend the findings of Bonneau and Hall and Gibson via a laboratory experiment on the effects of elections on public perceptions of judicial legitimacy. In the end, we find that because elections preempt the use of the other main selection method—appointment—they actually enhance perceptions of judicial legitimacy rather than diminish them.

Recent Developments in the Ukrainian Judicial System and the Impact of International and European Law

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Tiede ◽  
Oscar Rennalls
Keyword(s):  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Current Reform ◽  
The Impact

Ukraine’s judicial system is still shackled by its Soviet past. Despite gaining independence in 1991, it is not surprising that this new sovereign state could not usher in overnight a new judicial system firmly based on the rule of law and the separation of powers. The author assesses current reform efforts in the Ukrainian justice sector in light of several European Union and Council of Europe recommendations for further steps in the constitutional development of Ukraine. Key reforms are analysed including the implications of the “small justice reform” of 2002 and the draft law on the judiciary and the status of judges. As Ukraine does not have an explicit strategy on Justice and Home Affairs, which makes any such analysis of recent justice reforms more difficult, its obligations in this area under several EU-Ukraine treaties and joint projects will be analysed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document