The general noun-modifying clause construction beyond Eurasia

I aim to provide a typological investigation of the General Noun-modifying Clause Construction (NMCC) in languages other than those of Eurasia. I show that the five properties proposed by Matsumoto et al. as potentially correlating with the General NMCC are rather areal features which are falsified by the data of languages from Africa and Europe. The semantic interpretability condition and the syntactic licensing condition of the General Noun-modifying Clause Construction need reconsidering. Semantically, I argue that the interpretability of the General NMCC depends both on the semantics of the head noun and that of the modifying clause because they show close interaction with each other. Syntactically, I propose three general syntactic properties of the languages with the General NMCC, i.e. (1) no relative pronouns or relative pronouns in competition with a general clause marker, (2) complex subordinate locutions composed of the general clause marker(s) (and a head noun), and (3) unified verb forms in subordination.

The Flexible Copyright Exception for ‘Non-Enjoyment’ Purposes ‒ Recent Amendment in Japan and Its Implication

After the long discussions in Japan over the introduction of a general clause on copyright exceptions since 2007, the ‘flexible’ provisions on copyright exceptions (Arts. 30-4, 47-4 and 47-5) were finally introduced into the Japanese Copyright Act in 2018 and came into effect in 2019. They differ widely from the US fair use clause and the UK fair dealing provisions. This article focuses on Art. 30-4, which comprehensively allows an exploitation of a work that is aimed at neither enjoying nor causing another person to enjoy the work. In particular, any exploitation for text-and-data mining (TDM) is widely permitted by any means under Art. 30-4, including for commercial purposes. The underlying theory behind this relates to the nature of copyright, or the justification for copyright protection that an exploitation not for ‘enjoyment’ purposes is beyond the inherent scope of copyright because it does not prejudice the opportunities of the copyright holders to receive compensation. While this might sound unusual, it is interesting to note that some similar theories can be found in Europe, some of which try to widely exclude TDM activities from the scope of copyright based on the idea of ‘a use as a work’. Considering such common characteristics of the theories regarding copyright and ‘enjoyment’ of a work, Art. 30-4 of the Japanese Copyright Act and the theoretical justification for it might have implications for other jurisdictions regarding copyright exceptions or the substantive scope of copyright.

Nadużycie prawa podmiotowego w sprawach o ustanowienie rozdzielności majątkowej i ustalenie nierównych udziałów w majątku wspólnym

<p>The purpose of the study is to determine the scope of application of the construction of abuse of subjective rights in cases involving the establishment of a regime of separate property by the court and the determination of unequal shares in the common property. The prerequisite for both the establishment of the regime of separate property and the determination of unequal shares in the common property are “important reasons”. In order to determine the admissibility of the application of Article 5 of the Polish Civil Code it is therefore necessary to define the meaning of the terms “important reasons” and “rules of social coexistence”. It is assumed herein that general clauses are a kind of reference, in terms of the interpretation of provisions to generically defined norms and non-legal assessments, which have, in principle, an axiological moral justification and, consequently, that only evaluative phrases, as “rules of social coexistence” can be referred to using this term. “Important reasons”, on the other hand, are not an evaluative phrase but an estimative phrase and therefore not a general clause. It was also considered that it could not be ruled the assessment, under Article 5 of the Polish Civil Code, of the request for the regime of separate property to be established by the court or the request for the establishment of unequal shares in the common property, taking into account the extent to which each of the spouses contributed to its creation.</p>

The Right to Strike by Medical Practitioners

<p>The right to strike action is one of the fundamental human rights and trade union freedoms. Strike, as a form of protest against broadly understood injustice is one of the most important measures of trade union protection of workers’ interests. However, the right to strike is not absolute and its legal use must often take into account the interests of the employer and third parties. The aim of the article is to assess – basing on a review of the literature and the case-law – the doctors’ right to strike from a legal, ethical and moral perspective. The issue of medical practitioners’ right to participate in a strike is ambiguous in view of the legislation currently in force, and two opposing positions have developed in the collective labour law literature. The problem of the legality of this form of protest of medical practitioners is nowadays left to the assessment of the parties to a collective bargaining dispute, carried out based on the general clause of a possible “threat to human life and health or national security”, with the lack of appropriate judicial review in this regard. It is, therefore, undoubtedly necessary for the legislature to take appropriate <em>pro futuro</em> legislative action.</p>

Application of the General Clause of Reasonableness and Criterion of Rationality in Polish Tax Law

This paper’s objective is to present two methods of introducing elements of the civil general clause of reasonableness into tax law. One of them is the lawmaking process, the other is the application of law, i.e. the decisions of tax authorities and the jurisprudence of national administrative courts.

Der Parlamentsvorbehalt in der Corona-Krise

Crises are not only a test for society, they also pose a challenge to the legal order. This is revealed by the worldwide handling of the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease with a clarity that until recently probably nobody thought possible. Even in liberal democratic states, far-reaching restrictions on personal freedoms have been imposed, including lockdowns. In addition to questions of proportionality, the scope of the parliamentary prerogative in the Corona crisis has been under discussion in Germany since March 2020. Contrary to some voices in legal literature, even serious encroachments on fundamental rights can be justified, at least temporarily, by executive orders based on the general clause under infection control law and its cursory clarifications. Though, as the duration and complexity of crisis management increases, so too does the constitutional exigency for fundamental decisions by the legislature. The question of parliamentary prerogative also arises in the discussion about compensation payments, for example, for closure of businesses and other establishments during the lockdown. Since special provisions of infection control law often do not apply, some advocate a recourse to unwritten state liability law. However, this law is only geared to selective compensation and does not usually provide a legal basis for state liability in the Corona crisis. Here, too, the legislature must make improvements, if encroachments on fundamental rights – namely on the freedom of property – are no longer deemed proportionate without financial compensation. When assessing proportionality, however, the numerous aid programs must be taken into account.

Axiology of Judicial Application of Enforcement Law: View on the Bailiff’s Discretion

<p class="Standard">In the article, the author focused on three theoretical and philosophical issues of the judicial enforcement law in Poland, connected with the new enforcement acts which entered into force on 1 January 2019. First, the judicial enforcement proceedings were presented as an element of the law application process. The axiological dimension of this law, the place and function of a court bailiff in the law application process and the introduction of general clauses, combined with the basic values of the court enforcement law in the form of efficiency, effectiveness and reliability, form the new picture of the judicial enforcement law. Secondly, the problem of a general clause as a “carrier” of extralegal criteria was discussed, which takes an important place in the process of enforcement law application in the new bailiff’s law. There is the special role of the “public interest” and the “interest of justice” clauses as normative constructions introduced by the legislator to judicial enforcement. Thirdly, an attempt was made to answer the question about the presence and possible limits of discretion (free decision-making) of a court bailiff in the surrounding of the new axiology of enforcement law, and especially the formulation of this issue in the process of operative interpretation of law by a court bailiff.</p>

Delegacyjna właściwość sądu ze względu na „dobro wymiaru sprawiedliwości” w postępowaniu cywilnym

The amendment introduced into the CCP general clause – „good justice”. The above delegation competence causes numerous interpretative controversies. Due to art. 45 item 1 of the Polish Constitution, the new regulation should be interpreted strictly. Too broad an interpretation may lead to a weakening of the authority of the judiciary. It should be assumed that the application can only be submitted by the court with territorial jurisdiction.