An obligation to maintain and preserve the security value of the transferred security and a breach of trust in article 355 paragraph 2 of Korean Criminal Code- Case Study on Korean Supreme Court Decision(Case No. 2019do9756, 2020) -

2021 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 225-266
Author(s):  
Soo Jin Kang
ILR Review ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryellen R. Kelley

According to the 1977 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Teamsters v. U.S., seniority systems that have disparate impacts on women and black workers as compared to white men are not necessarily illegal. This paper uses a case study to examine what constitutes illegally discriminatory treatment in a seniority system in light of the Teamsters decision and subsequent rulings by federal courts. The empirical findings strongly suggest that as of 1976, at least with respect to promotions, the seniority system in the plant studied illegally discriminated against white women and black workers. The author concludes that the methodology used in this case can be applied more generally to other establishments where formal rules and organizational structures are important in shaping promotion opportunities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-259
Author(s):  
Nurhani Fithriah

Brand registration is very important for business people. A brand is one of the distinguishing entities between the business activities of business actors. The problem occurs when business actors already have a trademark which is then well known in the community but in fact they have not registered the trademark, as experienced by Ruben Samuel Onsu with his Geprek chicken business. However, in its development, it turns out that there are other business actors using the same mark but have registered the mark. This research was conducted using a normative method through a statutory approach and concepts. This research examines the Supreme Court's decision rejecting the appeal from Ruben Samuel Onsu and analyzes the urgency and procedures for trademark registration. Based on the research results, trademark law in Indonesia is regulated in Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications. The terms and procedures for application for registration of a mark are regulated in Article 4 - Article 8 and further regulated in the Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights No. registration of a mark and being recognized as the legal owner of the mark and rights to the mark are obtainedafter the mark is registered. Ruben Onsu's Bensu mark was declared invalid because Ruben Onsu was not the first party to register the mark, and the Supreme Court decided to cancel all trademark applications made by Ruben Onsu.


2005 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 813-851
Author(s):  
Pierre Rainville

Even though section 338 Cr.C. appears in Part VIII of the Criminal Code entitled « Fraudulent transactions relating to Contracts and Trade », the criminal offence of fraud is of a much broader scope. The liberal interpretation received from the courts has transformed this crime into one of the widest and sometimes most unpredictable offences. The author first discusses Canada's territorial jurisdiction over international fraud in the light of the recent Libman case. He then proceeds to examine the impact of the Supreme Court decision in Vezina v. R. on the « deprivation » requirement in the definition of fraud. This text also concentrates on the objective-subjective mens rea dilemna and on a comparison of the constitutive elements of fraud, theft and false pretences. The author finally concludes that sections 320 and 338 Cr.C call out for immediate reform.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 228
Author(s):  
Safrin Salam

The existence of the Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI) in Indonesia that still exist to this day is one manifestation of diakomodasinya patterns of dispute resolution outside the court. Legal Considerations Application Reasons Cancellation Arbitral Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Supreme Court Decision No. 199 K / Pdt.Sus / 2012 Relation Ensure Legal Certainty In the disputing parties are legal considerations of the cancellation decision was not all acceptance or rejection of the cancellation request arbitration decision based on legal grounds contained in Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999. Act No. 30 of 1999 on the ADR needs to be improved, especially the explanation of article 60 and article 70 which could lead to legal uncertainty for justice seekers among businesses in the dispute and the opportunity loss of trust businesses to resolve the dispute out of court through arbitration institution (the Arbitration Tribunal Ad-Hoc, BANI, etc.)


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pabhawan Suttiprasit ◽  
Winai Wongsurawat

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyze an unusual legal development concerning brand protection in Thailand. The case study elucidates many key concepts in brand management and the political economy of Thailand. Design/methodology/approach A case study approach is adopted, in which a chronology of key events surrounding a supreme court decision are developed. An analysis of the causes and consequences of the verdict is presented drawing on inputs from legal and business experts. Findings The decision at the center of this case is ground breaking. Unlike conventional infringement decisions that are based on tangible designs of products, this case established protection of a brand image based on advertisements aired on television. It is argued that the decision went too far in the protection of trade dress and may potentially limit freedom and creativity for future marketing campaigns. Practical implications Intellectual property protection in developing economies such as in Thailand can be complicated by a lack of clear laws and the political and social influence of the parties involved. Originality/value The case provides the first analysis of a potentially consequential supreme court decision with links to the unique context of the political economy of Thailand.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra

The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the actions of the defendant already fulfilling the elements of Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court Decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016 and to illustrate the basic consideration of the judge in imposing a verdict on a criminal offense charged with Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016. The method used in this study is normative law research. Data collection methods in this study were carried out with literature study, which is a method of collecting data by searching and reviewing library materials (literature, research results, scientific magazines, scientific bulletins, scientific journals). Data collection techniques using qualitative analysis methods. The conclusion in this study is the application of material criminal law by the Panel of Judges of the Supreme Court in the case of Number 1043 K / PID / 2016 which corrected the decision of the Banjarmasin High Court Number 59 / PID / 2016 / PT.BJM, dated 13 July 2016 which strengthened the Kotabaru District Court Decision Number 64 / Pid.B/2016/PN. Ktb, dated April 27, 2016 stating that the defendant Nanang Ramli bin (late) Syamsudin was proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal act of maltreatment which resulted in the death of the victim Jumadi alias jumai bin yahya ( alm) as stipulated in Article 351 paragraph (3) the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) is correct, it is in accordance with the Public Prosecutor's Subsidies indictment, and has been based on the facts of the trial, the evidence presented The Public Prosecutor is in the form of witness statements, evidence, post mortem, and statements of the defendant. The Panel of Judges of the Kotabaru District Court in its consideration there are still some shortcomings, especially in its subjective considerations, namely on consideration of things that are burdensome and matters that alleviate the defendant. The consideration used by the judge in this case only focuses on the perpetrators of the crime. Whereas Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law Number 48 Year concerning Judicial Power requires judges to explore, follow, and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that lives in society. This means that the judge must also consider the loss of the crime victim, and the community


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document