scholarly journals Upper House Reform in Germany: the Commission for the Modernization of the Federal System

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (1, 2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2008
Author(s):  
Taylor Greg
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Federal System ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
House Of Lords

As the debate on a possible new second leg- islative chamber proceeds both in the United Kingdom (U.K.) and Canada, it is useful to note recent amendments to the German Con- stitution (Basic Law) affecting the federal up- per house of Parliament (Bundesrat). Despite all the differences among the House of Lords, the Canadian Senate,1 and the Bundesrat, there are some points on which a comparison is use- ful. Moreover, some of the impetus behind the German reforms — a conviction that there had been too much emphasis on cooperative feder- alism and too little on healthy competition — is reminiscent of debates about such matters in other federations in general, and Canada in particular.

scholarly journals BLACK V. CHRÉTIEN AND THE CONTROL OF THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (1, 2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2002
Author(s):  
Noel Cox
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Model ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

Conrad Black, a prominent publisher and businessman in both Canada and the United Kingdom, submitted his name for one of the peerages to be created for the new-model House of Lords following the House of Lords Act 1999.1 The rights and duties of peers depend entirely upon custom.2 The principal legal distinction of British peers is — or was — their right to sit and vote in Parliament.3 Not all peers however were Lords of Parliament (principally the Irish peers not also possessing another peerage entitling them to a seat), and some Lords of Parliament, the bishops, are not peers.4 Essentially, Black was seeking, and had been promised, a seat in the upper house of the British Parliament.

scholarly journals Control Over Personal Information in the Database Era

2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Andrejevic
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
The State ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

In February 2009 the House of Lords Constitutional Committee in the United Kingdom published the report Surveillance: Citizens and the State. Some have hailed this as a landmark document. The following is one of four commentaries that the editors of Surveillance & Society solicited in response to the report.

scholarly journals Drivers for Internationalization in Georgian Higher Education

2020 ◽  
pp. 91-104
Author(s):  
Pusa Nastase
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Student Mobility ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Export Strategy ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Almost Everywhere ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Institutional Expansion

Abstract Internationalization of higher education has been on the rise almost everywhere in Europe for the past two decades, from countries like the United Kingdom that have put higher education at the heart of their export strategy (An overview of the higher education exports and their value to the United Kingdom economy is provided by the debate on 19 July 2018 in the House of Lords available at https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/lln-2018-0079/.) to countries in Eastern Europe which are relatively active in student mobility but less internationalized in other areas (faculty profiles, research outputs, institutional expansion abroad). However, as a result of many factors, including an unprecedented number of European students benefitting from free and quality higher education available in other countries, and the strengthening of economic nationalism, we see a refocus in internationalization in many Western countries. This study investigates the drivers of internationalization in Georgian universities. Data was collected through interviews with Georgian ministry officials, heads of governmental agencies, rectors and faculty from Georgian universities in addition to documents and web sites analysis. This study presents an insight into national, institutional and individual drivers for internationalization in Georgia and the challenges experienced.

R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Brind [1991] UKHL 4, House of Lords

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Home Department ◽  
Editorial Decisions

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Brind [1991] UKHL 4, House of Lords. The case considered whether the Secretary of State could restrict the editorial decisions of broadcasters as regards the way in which messages from spokespersons for proscribed organizations were broadcast. The United Kingdom was a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) when the case was heard, but the case also predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. There is discussion of the legal position of the ECHR under the common law in the United Kingdom, and the concept of proportionality in United Kingdom’s domestic jurisprudence. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Public authority negligence revisited

2000 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.H. Bailey ◽  
M.J. Bowman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
London Borough ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Borough Council ◽  
Legitimate Interests

Following on from earlier consideration of this issue by the same authors in the 1980s, this article examines the principles governing the negligence liability of public authorities as articulated in recent cases, and in particular the decisions of the House of Lords in X v. Bedfordshire, Stovin v. Wise and Barrett v. Enfield London Borough Council. It concludes that the various attempts to establish special principles to govern such liability have been misguided, and that the courts have proved too willing to reject claims on the basis of questionable policy considerations, to the extent that a blanket immunity might appear to have been established in some contexts. Ultimately, this approach has brought the United Kingdom into conflict with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. It is argued that ordinary private law principles provide a wholly appropriate basis for reconciling the legitimate interests of public authorities with the need to accord justice to individual litigants.

1 Legal Status (Personality), 1.4 Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and others , 21 February 1991, United Kingdom House of Lords, 85 ILR 1

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schmalenbach Kirsten
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Director General ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Domestic Law

This article examines the question of what is the legal basis for granting foreign international organizations legal personality under the law of a state which is neither a party to the founding instrument nor the host state. In the considered case the House of Lords was faced with the task of deciding on the legal personality status of the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF) after the organization instituted fraud proceedings against a former Director General in the United Kingdom. As the founding treaty of the AMF had not been incorporated into UK law, the organization was not recognized under domestic law. The House of Lords took recourse to the federal decree of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) which had granted the AMF domestic legal personality.

Lessons Learned and Experiences Shared From the Front Lines: United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (6) ◽  
pp. 585-590
Author(s):  
Steven D. Wexner ◽  
Delia Cortés-Guiral ◽  
Neil Mortensen ◽  
Ara Darzi
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Respiratory Illness ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
American College Of Surgeons ◽  
Skilled Personnel ◽  
President Elect

This is the second installment of a series of interviews, conducted by the senior author (S.D.W.) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS), that feature international leaders in surgery telling of the challenges they faced during the global COVID-19 pandemic. The disease arrived in the United Kingdom with devastating effects within a few weeks of its spread to Western Europe from China. In Oxford, Professor Neil Mortensen used his position as the President-elect of the Royal College of Surgeons of England to help coordinate efforts among the 4 Royal Colleges in the United Kingdom (his own, London, Edinburgh, and Ireland) to mobilize and retrain surgeons for duty helping to support in the critical care of patients with respiratory illness from the virus. In London, Lord Ara Darzi, a colon and rectal surgeon and leading innovator in minimally invasive surgery, underwent re-education himself in respiratory care to help his medical colleagues. As a member of the House of Lords involved in matters regarding the National Health Service as former Parliamentary Undersecretary of Health, he facilitated legislative measures to increase the physician workforce necessary to meet the demand for skilled personnel. Professor Mortensen and Lord Darzi have been recognized as honorary fellows of the ACS for their contributions to surgery. “Lots of people do not think it can possibly happen to them”, Professor Mortensen said, “Our experience is that it will happen to you, and you cannot be prepared enough. Preparation, preparation, preparation is what you need to do.”

The Courts and the Executive: Four House of Lords Decisions

1977 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Allott
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

The purpose of the present study is to consider the constitutional significance of four House of Lords decisions which raise fundamental questions about the legal status of the Executive branch of government in the United Kingdom and its relationship to the courts. The decisions are those in: Burmah Oil Co. Ltd. v. Lord Advocate [1965] A.C. 75; [1964] 2 All E.R. 348; Carl Zeiss Stiftung v. Rayner & Keeler Ltd. (No. 2) [1967] 1 A.C. 853; [1966] 2 All E.R. 536; Conway v. Rimmer [1968] A.C. 910; [1968] 1 All E.R. 874; Nissan v. Attorney-General [1970] A.C. 179; [1969] 1 All E.R. 629.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document