scholarly journals Software patents as such: Software patentability in New Zealand under the Patents Bill

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Saadi Radcliffe
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Distributed Systems ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Market Incentives ◽  
Software Patents

<p>This paper examines the patentability of software under the Patents Bill. It attempts to determine how a New Zealand court will interpret the provisions of the Patents Bill that relate to the exclusion of software, and to what extent the “as such” exclusion will apply. It does this by looking at principles of statutory interpretation and the relevant English and European case law on the matter. It concludes that a New Zealand court will interpret the provision in accordance with UK precedent to give it a narrower interpretation than that given in Europe. The paper then examines the consistency of the provisions with the relevant international law before discussing some problems that may arise regarding market incentives and distributed systems. It proposes that the provision strikes an appropriate balance between protection and innovation in line with Parliament’s intent.</p>

scholarly journals Software patents as such: Software patentability in New Zealand under the Patents Bill

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Saadi Radcliffe
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Distributed Systems ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Market Incentives ◽  
Software Patents

<p>This paper examines the patentability of software under the Patents Bill. It attempts to determine how a New Zealand court will interpret the provisions of the Patents Bill that relate to the exclusion of software, and to what extent the “as such” exclusion will apply. It does this by looking at principles of statutory interpretation and the relevant English and European case law on the matter. It concludes that a New Zealand court will interpret the provision in accordance with UK precedent to give it a narrower interpretation than that given in Europe. The paper then examines the consistency of the provisions with the relevant international law before discussing some problems that may arise regarding market incentives and distributed systems. It proposes that the provision strikes an appropriate balance between protection and innovation in line with Parliament’s intent.</p>

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.3 Australasia: Coordinated by Brooke Marshall, 42 New Zealand: New Zealand Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hook Maria
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Position ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Legislative Reform ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines the choice of law rules that determine the law applicable to international contracts in New Zealand, comparing them to the Hague Principles. Private international law in New Zealand is still largely a common law subject, and the choice of law rules on international commercial contracts are no exception. The general position, which has been inherited from English common law, is that parties may choose the law applicable to their contract, and that the law with the closest and most real connection applies in the absence of choice. There are currently no plans in New Zealand for legislative reform, so the task of interpreting and developing the choice of law rules continues to fall to the courts. When performing this task, New Zealand courts have traditionally turned to English case law for assistance. But they may be willing, in future, to widen their scope of inquiry, given that the English rules have long since been Europeanized. It is conceivable, in this context, that the Hague Principles may be treated as a source of persuasive authority, provided they are consistent with the general principles or policies underlying the New Zealand rules.

Part VI Constitutional Theory, A Constitutional Interpretation, Ch.41 Constitutional Interpretation: On Issues of Ontology and of Interlegality

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beaulac Stéphane
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Theory ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Constitutional Interpretation ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Domestic Use ◽  
Contemporary Approach

The chapter addresses, first, the ontological issue of whether the interpretation of a constitution is fundamentally different than the construction of statutes. Based on a comparison of the Supreme Court of Canada decisions in constitutional interpretation, especially Charter cases, and the contemporary approach to statutory interpretation, endorsing Driedger’s modern principle, it is argued that a convergence of methodology has occurred. Second, recent developments in the domestic use of international law—that is interlegality—also show commonality in constitutional and statutory interpretation. The hypothesis is that recent case law on the operationalization of international normativity, far from supporting the end of the international/national divide, actually reaffirms the Westphalian paradigm. The contextual argument and the presumption of conformity, as interpretative tools, allow courts to be more flexible, indeed more permissive, in resorting to international law.

Can housing rights be applied to modern housing systems?

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Padraic Kenna
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Epistemic Communities ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Housing Systems ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Housing Rights ◽  
The World ◽  
Effective Translation

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline and examine the growing corpus of housing rights and assess their relevance and applicability to complex contemporary housing systems across the world.Design/methodology/approachThe paper sets out the principal instruments and commentaries on housing rights developed by the United Nations, regional and other bodies. It assesses their relevance in the context of contemporary analysis of housing systems, organized and directed by networks of legal and other professionals within particular domains.FindingsHousing rights instruments are accepted by all States across the world at the level of international law, national constitutions and laws. The findings suggest that there are significant gaps in the international law conception and framework of housing rights, and indeed, human rights generally, which create major obstacles for the effective implementation of these rights. There is a preoccupation with one element of housing systems, that of subsidized or social housing. However, effective housing rights implementation requires application at meso‐, micro‐ and macro‐levels of modern, dynamic housing systems as a whole. Epistemic communities of professionals develop and shape housing law and policy within these domains. The housing rights paradigm must be further fashioned for effective translation into contemporary housing systems.Research limitations/implicationsThe development of housing rights precedents, both within international and national law, is leading to a wide and diffuse corpus of legislation and case law. More research is needed on specific examples of effective coupling between housing rights and elements of housing systems.Originality/valueThis paper offers housing policy makers and lawyers an avenue into the extensive jurisprudence and writings on housing rights, which will inevitably become part of the lexicon of housing law across the world. It also highlights the limitations of housing rights implementation, but offers some new perspectives on more effective application of these rights.

The International Law Standard in the Statutes of Australia and the United Kingdom

1979 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 628-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Crawford
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Robert Wilson ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
International Role

In a series of articles in this Journal, Professor Robert Wilson drew attention to the incorporation of references to international law in United States statutes, a technique designed to allow recourse to international law by the courts in interpreting and implementing those statutes, and, consequently, to help ensure conformity between international and U.S. law. The purpose of this article is to survey the references, direct and indirect, to international law in the 20th-century statutes of two Commonwealth countries in order to see to what extent similar techniques have been adopted. The choice of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth of Australia as the subjects of this survey is no doubt somewhat arbitrary (although passing reference will be made to the legislation of Canada and New Zealand). But the United Kingdom, a semi-unitary state whose involvement in international relations has been substantial throughout the century, and the Commonwealth of Australia, a federal polity with substantial legislative power over foreign affairs and defense -whose international role has changed markedly since 1901, do provide useful examples of states with constitutional and legislative continuity since 1901, and (as will be seen) considerable legislative involvement in this field.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document