scholarly journals Solvency Test in Polish Simple Joint-Stock Company: A Review and Comparative Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 207-233
Author(s):  
Andrzej Herbet ◽  
Natalia Wielgat
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Solvency Test ◽  
The Subject

The subject of the article is a comparative analysis of the solvency test - a legal instrument that conditions causa societatis payments for limited liability companies upon ascertaining their impact on its future liquidity (ability to pay debts as they come due), which has recently been incorporated into the Polish legal system with reference to a simple joint-stock company (pol. Prosta Spółka Akcyjna) (Article 30015 § 5 of Polish Commercial Companies Code). Considering that the solvency test originated in common law, the comparative analysis of the instrument in question was set against the background of selected foreign legal systems, i.e., the law of New Zealand, United States and the United Kingdom, where the solvency test is shaped much differently than the polish one.

scholarly journals The scope of rights of appeal (not recourse) from arbitration awards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test).  This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>

Freedom of Proof and the Reform of Criminal Evidence

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 439-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Twining
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
Evidence And Proof ◽  
Law Of Evidence ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Historical Origins

In recent years reform of the Law of Evidence has been the subject of renewed interest in many common law countries. Since the adoption of the Federal Rules, debate about wholesale reform has been relatively muted in the United States. But this is exceptional. Major reports have been produced in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Scotland, and England. With the exception of Canada, most of these have led, or are likely to lead, to significant legislative changes. This period of reformist activity has coincided with a greatly increased interest in theoretical aspects of evidence and proof, sometimes referred to as “The New Evidence Scholarship”. The historical origins of these two movements are rather different, but their ways of talking and thinking about the subject are, of course, intimately connected.

scholarly journals Putting the Corporation in its Place

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 687-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Guinnane ◽  
Ron Harris ◽  
Naomi R. Lamoreaux ◽  
Jean-Laurent Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Business Organization ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Personhood ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Anglo American

This article challenges the idea that the corporation is a globally superior form of business organization and that the Anglo-American common-law is more conducive to economic development than the code-based legal systems characteristic of continental Europe. Although the corporation had important advantages over the main alternative form of organization (partnerships), it also had disadvantages that limited its appeal to small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). As a result, when businesses were provided with an intermediate choice, the private limited liability company (PLLC) that combined the advantages of legal personhood and joint stock with a flexible internal organizational structure, most chose not to organize as corporations. This article tracks the changes that occurred in the menu of business organizational forms in two common-law countries (the United Kingdom and the United States) and two countries governed by legal codes (France and Germany) and presents data showing the rapidity with which firms in each country responded to enabling legislation for PLLCs. We show that the PLLC was introduced first and most easily in a code country (Germany) and last and with the most difficulty in a commonlaw country (the United States). Late introduction was associated with prolonged use of the partnership form, suggesting that the disadvantages of corporations did indeed weigh heavily on SMEs.

scholarly journals The scope of rights of appeal (not recourse) from arbitration awards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test).  This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>

scholarly journals The scope of rights of appeal (not recourse) from arbitration awards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test). This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>

scholarly journals THE SUBJECT OF ASSETS VALUATION CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL TO BUSINESS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF BUSINESS LAW IN 2014

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (28) ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Thao Thi Phuong Ngo ◽  
Thu Thi Mai Do
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Business Law ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law

The article refers to the legal provisions of Business Law in 2014 on the subject of assets valuation contributed capital to the types of businesses: limited liability  company, partnership, joint-stock company. This article does not discuss businesses with foreign elements and State businesses. From the analysis of legal  provisions, this article has pointed out the limitations of the law on the subject of assets valuation contributed capital to business, and proposed the ways to improvement of the law on this issue.

scholarly journals The scope of rights of appeal (not recourse) from arbitration awards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test). This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>

scholarly journals Resettling Refugees through Community Sponsorship: A Revolutionary Operational Approach Built on Traditional Legal Infrastructure

Refuge ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Bond ◽  
Ania Kwadrans
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
The United States ◽  
Refugee Resettlement ◽  
National Program ◽  
Operational Approach ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Infrastructure

More than a dozen states are exploring the potential of introducing community sponsorship programs as a way of contributing to the global refugee protection regime. This article provides a comparative analysis of the legal and administrative frameworks that have underpinned the introduction of community sponsorship in four diverse countries: Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Argentina. We also briefly examine the introduction of co-sponsorship in the United States, a country without any formal national program. We conclude that while community sponsorship programs have the potential to revolutionize refugee resettlement, their operationalization is not contingent on revolutionary legal infrastructure.

Effectiveness of Programs for the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amaia Del Campo ◽  
Marisalva Fávero
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Prevention Programs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sexual Abuse Prevention ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Methodological Considerations

Abstract. During the last decades, several studies have been conducted on the effectiveness of sexual abuse prevention programs implemented in different countries. In this article, we present a review of 70 studies (1981–2017) evaluating prevention programs, conducted mostly in the United States and Canada, although with a considerable presence also in other countries, such as New Zealand and the United Kingdom. The results of these studies, in general, are very promising and encourage us to continue this type of intervention, almost unanimously confirming its effectiveness. Prevention programs encourage children and adolescents to report the abuse experienced and they may help to reduce the trauma of sexual abuse if there are victims among the participants. We also found that some evaluations have not considered the possible negative effects of this type of programs in the event that they are applied inappropriately. Finally, we present some methodological considerations as critical analysis to this type of evaluations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document