340 Recht
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (662)
- Article (581)
- Working Paper (466)
- Review (296)
- Book (165)
- Conference Proceeding (125)
- Part of a Book (66)
- Contribution to a Periodical (58)
- Doctoral Thesis (44)
- Report (25)
Language
- German (1861)
- English (593)
- French (12)
- Italian (11)
- Multiple languages (9)
- Spanish (9)
- Portuguese (5)
- Latin (4)
- dut (1)
- mis (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2508) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutschland (83)
- Aktienrecht (17)
- Urheberrecht (17)
- Kapitalmarktrecht (16)
- Recht (16)
- global justice (16)
- Coronavirus (14)
- Corporate Governance (13)
- Börsenrecht (12)
- Democracy (12)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (1343)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (145)
- Präsidium (126)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (109)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (80)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (70)
- House of Finance (HoF) (57)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (53)
- Institute for Law and Finance (ILF) (51)
- Foundation of Law and Finance (46)
The expansion of actors and instruments in sovereign debt markets through bond financing generated a coordination problem among bondholders during the debt restructuring process. There is a risk that an individual bondholder will be passive or act against the restructuring slowing down or even precluding the process of restructuring even though it is in the general interest of bondholders as a group, not to mention the population of the country experiencing the shortage of funds for public welfare. In particular, the disruptions to sovereign debt restructuring by frivolous litigation is considered as one of the main threats.
This dissertation is the first major study devoted to sovereign bonds structured through a trust arrangement and the promising features that such a legal structure possesses for an effective and efficient sovereign debt restructuring. It provides a comprehensive inquiry into the evolution of the mechanisms to coordinate creditors, with a focus on bondholders and institutional frameworks which facilitated this coordination. It examines intriguing primary sources from League of Nations archives and provides in-depth case studies on the functionality of the trustees in sovereign bond restructurings performed by Argentina in 2016 and Ecuador in 2008.
Assessing the utility of trust arrangements to address coordination problems, this thesis is driven by the puzzle: How to better balance (i) the need for smooth sovereign debt restructurings, which by definition entails some losses for creditors, with (ii) bondholders’ legitimate interests? What approach can be used in constructing a legal and institutional framework for trustees to promote the best interest of the bondholders in sovereign debt restructuring? As a solution, it seems that incentives for bond trustees to pursue debt sustainability will achieve both goals.
In this regard, recognition of the concept of debt sustainability, being in substance the IMF and WB debt sustainability assessment, as the best interest of bondholders in sovereign debt restructuring is beneficial from multiple aspects. It enables a bond trustee to excel in its role as a guardian of bondholders by following the best interest of bondholders in exercising its discretion. Moreover, it fosters an equilibrium between the interests of private creditors and a state taking into account its socio-political aspects.
Das Forschungsprojekt KviAPol (Körperverletzung im Amt durch Polizeibeamte und -beamtinnen) untersucht polizeiliche Gewaltanwendungen, die aus Sicht der Betroffenen rechtswidrig waren, mittels quantitativer Online-Befragung sowie die polizeiliche, justizielle und zivilgesellschaftliche Perspektive auf rechtswidrige Polizeigewalt und deren Aufarbeitung in Deutschland mittels qualitativer Interviews. Zum Team gehören die Wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeiterinnen Laila Abdul-Rahman, Hannah Espín Grau und Luise Klaus sowie Prof. Dr. Tobias Singelnstein, der die Projektleitung innehat.
Search costs for lenders when evaluating potential borrowers are driven by the quality of the underwriting model and by access to data. Both have undergone radical change over the last years, due to the advent of big data and machine learning. For some, this holds the promise of inclusion and better access to finance. Invisible prime applicants perform better under AI than under traditional metrics. Broader data and more refined models help to detect them without triggering prohibitive costs. However, not all applicants profit to the same extent. Historic training data shape algorithms, biases distort results, and data as well as model quality are not always assured. Against this background, an intense debate over algorithmic discrimination has developed. This paper takes a first step towards developing principles of fair lending in the age of AI. It submits that there are fundamental difficulties in fitting algorithmic discrimination into the traditional regime of anti-discrimination laws. Received doctrine with its focus on causation is in many cases ill-equipped to deal with algorithmic decision-making under both, disparate treatment, and disparate impact doctrine. The paper concludes with a suggestion to reorient the discussion and with the attempt to outline contours of fair lending law in the age of AI.
We investigate the impact of uneven transparency regulation across countries and industries on the location of economic activity. Using two distinct sources of regulatory variation—the varying extent of financial-reporting requirements and the staggered introduction of electronic business registers in Europe—, we consistently document that direct exposure to transparency regulation is negatively associated with the focal industry’s economic activity in terms of inputs (e.g., employment) and outputs (e.g., production). By contrast, we find that indirect exposure to supplier and customer industries’ transparency regulation is positively associated with the focal industry’s economic activity. Our evidence suggests uneven transparency regulation can reallocate economic activity from regulated toward unregulated countries and industries, distorting the location of economic activity.
Der Beitrag stellt dar, wie Online-Plattformen in den Bereichen Urheberrecht, Hassrede und Desinformation in der EU reguliert wurden. Die Analyse ergibt einen Regulierungskreislauf, der in vier Phasen ablief. Bis zum Jahrtausendwechsel war es die Legislative, die einen allgemeinen gesetzlichen Rahmen für die Online-Kommunikation in Gestalt von Äußerungsverboten und Haftungsprivilegierungen definierte. Dieser Rahmen wurde im folgenden Jahrzehnt von den Betreibern der neu entstehenden Plattformen unter Ausnutzung ihres privatautonomen Gestaltungsspielraums implementiert. In der dritten Phase ab ca. 2010 verschärften die Judikative und die Exekutive die sich aus dem allgemeinen gesetzlichen Rahmen ergebenden Mindestanforderungen an die Bekämpfung von Urheberrechtsverletzungen, Hassrede und Desinformation. In der vorläufig letzten Phase des Regulierungskreislaufs ab 2017/2018 ergriff wieder der Gesetzgeber die Initiative, indem die Standards, die in den Phasen zwei und drei entwickelt worden waren, kodifiziert und teilweise nochmals angehoben wurden. Damit ist der Kreislauf der unionalen Plattformregulierung allerdings nicht zu seinem Ende gekommen. Vielmehr ist bereits erkennbar, dass sich nun wieder eine eher experimentell-tastende Phase privatautonomer Implementierung und ko-regulativer Fortentwicklung des neuen gesetzlichen Rahmens anschließt. Der Beitrag schließt mit einer kurzen Bewertung dieser Entwicklung hin zu mehr hoheitlicher Kommunikationskontrolle.
In den letzten zwei Jahrzehnten sind Anmeldungen von Rechten des geistigen Eigentums (intellectual property, IP) bzw. Verletzungsklagen wiederholt an der unzureichenden Bestimmtheit des exklusiv beanspruchten Gegenstands gescheitert. Ihren Ausgang nahm diese Entwicklung im Markenrecht mit Entscheidungen des EuGH (Stichworte: Sieckmann, Heidelberger Bauchemie, Dyson, IP Translator, Oy Hartwall) und später auch des BGH (Stichwort: UHU). Die markenrechtlichen Grundsätze strahlten auf das Designrecht (Stichworte: Sporthelm, Mast-Jägermeister) und zuletzt auch auf das Urheberrecht (Stichwort: Levola) aus. Im Folgenden werden die maßgeblichen Urteile zur Schutzfähigkeit von Zeichen, Designs und Werken zusammengetragen und systematisiert. Dabei treten zwei Aspekte eines Bestimmtheitsgebots zu Tage, die, wie abschließend zu zeigen sein wird, auch im Patentrecht gelten
The dissertation explores to what extent the post-financial crisis EU resolution regime, based on equity/debt write-down and conversion powers and bail-in tools will be effective in maintaining the stability of bank groups. To arrive at its unique angle, it first asks why bank groups are considered complex, thereby explaining the reasons for their proliferation and instability, and how this may inform the view regarding a desired regulatory framework. The main observation the dissertation makes is that, notwithstanding of other factors already pointed out in the literature, bank groups adopt complex structures with multiple entities, as it allows them, inter alia, to use double-leverage financing structures and internal capital markets.
Double-leverage financing structures allow bank groups to optimise the combination of their debt/equity funding from external parent entity investors with a combination of debt/equity funding downstreamed internally to subsidiaries and other entities in the bank group. An important component within this structure is also that the allocation of the bank group’s resources takes place through the internal capital market (ICM). The allocation of resources via the ICM allows bank groups to manage their liquidity constraint either to undertake activities that are more profitable, or to stabilise the financial position of the group as a whole.
While both double leverage and ICMs can optimise the funding and allocation of resources of the bank group, respectively, they can also generate perils to the stability of the bank group. In particular, this is because double-leverage can result in excessive risk taking and regulatory arbitrage. Moreover, the allocation of the intra-group resources in the ICM may not maintain the financial health of all subsidiaries in the bank group, which can prove to be incompatible with the financial stability goals of the regulators in the countries where those subsidiaries conduct their business.
Within this context, the dissertation argues that the current EU resolution regime does not clearly address issues of double leverage when setting out capital and other liability requirements, i.e. the ‘Total Loss Absorbing Capacity’ (TLAC) and ‘Minimum Requirement for Eligible Liabilities’ (MREL) requirements. Moreover, the dissertation emphasis that it is equally relevant to clarify the way in which the bank group resources are available ahead of, and in financial distress. It is argued that to this end, bank groups need to be allowed to make use of the ICM as it is often uncertain what may be the cause of the financial distress and how the resources of the bank group could be used to stabilise it. To this end, the dissertation highlights that there is lack of clarity in both the ex-ante provisions on intra-group support framework and in the ex-post provisions governing the allocation of any surplus TLAC/MREL resources.
Besides the ‘intra-group’ issues within the bank group, the third point the dissertation makes relation to the bank group’s presence in multiple jurisdictions. This transnational element adds to the complexity of the intra-group issues resulting from sub-optimal cooperation between home and host authorities. In this regard, the dissertation underlines that the current framework could adopt a more balanced way in which the regulatory fora will take into account the interest of the authorities of all parts of the bank group.
Disagreement among philosophers over the proper justification for political institutions is far from a new phenomenon. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that there is substantial room for dissent on this matter within democratic theory. As is well known, instrumentalism and proceduralism represent the two primary viewpoints that democrats can adopt to vindicate democratic legitimacy. While the former notoriously derives the value of democracy from its outcomes, the latter claims that a democratic decision-making process is inherently valuable. This article has two aims. First, it introduces three variables with which we can thoroughly categorise the aforementioned approaches. Second, it argues that the more promising version of proceduralism is extrinsic, rather than intrinsic, and that extrinsically procedural accounts can appeal to other values in the justification of democracy without translating into instrumentalism. This article is organised as follows. I present what I consider to be the ‘implicit view’ in the justification of democracy. Then, I analyse each of the three variables in a different section. Finally, I raise an objection against procedural views grounded in relational equality, which cannot account for the idea that democracy is a necessary condition for political legitimacy.
Egon Lorenz – zum Gedenken
(2020)