Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (103)
- 2020 (34)
- 2021 (24)
- 2022 (20)
- 2013 (16)
- 2014 (16)
- 2018 (16)
- 2016 (15)
- 2003 (14)
- 2019 (12)
- 2017 (11)
- 2002 (9)
- 2005 (9)
- 2008 (8)
- 2015 (8)
- 2023 (8)
- 1993 (7)
- 1996 (6)
- 2024 (6)
- 2001 (5)
- 2004 (5)
- 1998 (4)
- 1999 (4)
- 2009 (4)
- 1990 (3)
- 1992 (3)
- 1997 (3)
- 2000 (3)
- 2006 (3)
- 2007 (3)
- 1991 (2)
- 1994 (2)
- 1982 (1)
- 1985 (1)
- 1989 (1)
- 1995 (1)
Document Type
- Working Paper (149)
- Conference Proceeding (101)
- Article (97)
- Part of a Book (15)
- Doctoral Thesis (11)
- Review (11)
- Preprint (3)
- Report (2)
- Other (1)
Language
- English (390) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (390) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (390) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutschland (14)
- Democracy (8)
- Corporate Governance (7)
- human rights (7)
- law (7)
- Internet (6)
- Law (6)
- Rule of Law (5)
- climate change (5)
- democracy (5)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (390) (remove)
Large companies are increasingly on trial. Over the last decade, many of the world’s biggest firms have been embroiled in legal disputes over corruption charges, financial fraud, environmental damage, taxation issues or sanction violations, ending in convictions or settlements of record-breaking fines, well above the billion-dollar mark. For critics of globalization, this turn towards corporate accountability is a welcome sea-change showing that multinational companies are no longer above the law. For legal experts, the trend is noteworthy because of the extraterritorial dimensions of law enforcement, as companies are increasingly held accountable for activities independent of their nationality or the place of the activities. Indeed, the global trend required understanding the evolution of corporate criminal law enforcement in the United States in particular, where authorities have skillfully expanded its effective jurisdiction beyond its territory. This paper traces the evolution of corporate prosecutions in the United States. Analyzing federal prosecution data, it then shows that foreign firms are more likely to pay a fine, which is on average 6,6 times larger.
The Dodd Frank Act of 2010 (DFA) was the legislative response by the US Government to the Global Financial Crisis of 2007. DFA’s rescission of Rule 436 (g) of the Securities Act of 1933 - the exemption from liability clause - was the response to the post-crisis perception that credit rating agencies were insufficiently constrained by reputational risk considerations and consistently failed to provide high quality and accurate credit ratings as a consequence of the immunity they enjoyed and the regulatory reliance placed on ratings, as well as the conflicts of interest that they faced. This paper investigates whether the market failure event that occurred in the Asset Backed Securities market immediately after DFA was signed into law on July 21, 2010 was due to real economic concerns held by rating agencies about operating under a liability regime or whether it was merely an act of brinkmanship on the part of the rating agencies. The paper also predominantly examines US case law to identify the dilution of the freedom of speech defence in state courts, the conflict of interest issues and the legal challenges faced by plaintiffs when bringing a lawsuit against credit rating agencies, and proposes a novel co-pay and capped liability model to address the concerns of both credit rating agencies and investors.
"Community and law approach" provides an illuminating insight into alternative legal orderings within a social unit. The comprehensiveness of legal systems within a community or a social unit, provides a suitable basis for a structural framework of alternative legal systems or Legal Pluralism, which is missing in the discourse on Legal Pluralism. "Identifying the locus of law within a community", provides us with an indication on how autopoetic a legal system can be within a social unit, taking into account the social rootedness of legal norms.
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the passage regime of the Turkish Straits against the background of the evolution of international law, and to discuss the problems of the passage of warships through them in light of the invasion of the Crimean Peninsula by Russia in 2014. With that objective in mind, the thesis reconsiders the history of the straits regime.
The Turkish Straits are regulated by the Montreux Convention of 1936 which contains restrictive and complex provisions regarding the passage of warships. The Straits took their place as “the Straits question” for centuries and today their importance is enhanced by their geostrategic location in the international arena. They have gained greater significance especially since the resolution of Soviet Russia in 1991, as they have become one of the most important and busiest energy corridors of the world. Due to the increase in the transportation of oil, natural gas and other products from the Caspian region through the Straits, the dense traffic and the regulation of the traffic in the Straits has become a key issue between Turkey and user states. Furthermore, the implementation of restrictive provisions for warships caused many debates during the Second World War, the impact of the restrictive provisions of the Convention on the South Ossetia War in August 2008, and the invasion of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014 attracted additional international attention. The Straits took their place on the global agenda of the great powers, especially those of NATO, the United States (US) and Russia. These events have resulted in ongoing and intensive discussions over the revision of the Convention.
Although no legal amendment or modification demand to the Montreux Convention has yet arisen, the new order and geopolitical interests in the Black Sea region show that the Montreux passage regime will continue to be debated by the world’s powers under any given political circumstances. For the time being, however, there will be no alternative route with a view at an adaptation to contemporary needs but methods of treaty modification below the threshold of formal revision as, most importantly, the integration of subsequent practice and subsequent agreement into treaty interpretation.
The venture capital industry holds relevance for entrepreneurs looking for money to finance an innovative project, investors seeking to make money by investing in entrepreneurial firms and governments trying to promote innovation and entrepreneurship. Venture capital investment could facilitate innovation and thus a better economy.
Venture capital has enabled the U.S. to support its entrepreneurial talent by turning ideas into world-famous products and services, building companies from mere business plans to mature and powerful organizations. Three of the five largest U.S. public companies by market capitalization – Apple, Google and Microsoft – received most of their early external funding from venture capital. Having its ups and downs, venture capital investment in the U.S. expanded from virtually zero in the mid-1970s to $8 billion in 1995 and $49.3 billion in 2014. Venture backed companies have been a prime driver of economic growth in the U.S.Across the pacific, venture capital investment in China has grown out of the transition from a centrally planned economy to a free market economy over the past three decades, becoming an important pillar supporting China’s innovation system. In 2015, a total of 2,824 venture capital investment deals provided an aggregate investment of $36.9 billion. Venture capital has long been a hot topic in China’s capital market, particularly since the government decided to boost “mass entrepreneurship and innovation” in 2014.
In the U.S., most venture capital firms are organized as limited partnerships, with the venture capitalists being general partners and the investors limited partners. Studies have shown that investors choose to invest through venture funds as an intermediary rather than placing their investments directly with the entrepreneurs; because of the high risk nature of the entrepreneur’s business, it is hard for them to get bank loans or direct equity investments. Conflicts may also arise, however, between the venture capitalists acting as agents and the investors as principals.5 This agency problem maybe particularly severe, since venture capital provides money for businesses with high potential and high risk, although the limited partnership has certain merits and is still most commonly chosen as the business form for venture capital funds.6 At the same time, the fact that general partners have total control of the partnership business necessitates that the agency problem is addressed by legal rules, contracts and other mechanisms.
Meanwhile, despite the rapid growth of venture capital investments in China, little attention has been paid to the organizational form of venture capital funds. In contrast to the U.S., most Chinese venture funds have been structured as corporations. One may argue that it was due to legislative reasons: that the limited partnership was not recognized by Chinese law when venture capital first appeared in China. However, after adopted a chapter was adopted in the Partnership Enterprise Law (PEL) governing limited partnerships in 2007, most of the venture funds abided by their choice, while those opting for the limited partnership have encountered difficulties: the limited partners are having trouble trusting the general partners with their money and are therefore interfering with the operation of the partnership business, which may lead to dissolution of the partnership.
This thesis applies transaction cost theory to explain the benefits and costs of choosing the limited partnership as a business form in the special context of venture capital investments, showing that the potential agency conflict between the general partners and the limited partners have been mitigated by legal and other mechanismsin the United States, and that the U.S. investors could therefore exploit the merit of the limited partnership form in venture capital financing. In China, investors have different answers to the agency problem. Similarly to the situation in the U.S., Chinese partners also employ contract terms to deal with agency problems, and the legislators enact laws that aim at regulating the limited partnership form; some legislation was even transplanted from the U.S., such as that part of the PEL which governs limited partnerships. It seems, then, that similar mechanisms that deal with agency problems also exist in China. However, given the unique history of the development of China’s innovation system and venture capital market, the effectiveness of these constraints is questionable. Chinese venture capital investors have therefore characteristically behaved differently to U.S. investors. Rather than relying on these questionable mechanisms, Chinese investors as well as the Chinese government have developed different approaches to addressing these agency problems.
Deutsche Fassung: Rechtsentfremdungen: Zum gesellschaftlichen Mehrwert des zwölften Kamels. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 21, 2000, 189-215 und in Gunther Teubner (Hg.) Die Rückgabe des zwölften Kamels: Niklas Luhmann in der Diskussion über Gerechtigkeit. Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart 2000, 189-215. Französische Fassung: Les multiples aliénations du droit : Sur la plus-value sociale du douzième chameau. Droit et Société 47, 2001, 75-100. Polnische Fassung: Sprawiedliwosc alienujaca : O dodatkowej wartosci dwunastego wielblada. Ius et Lex 1, 2002, 109-132. Italienische Fassung: Le molteplici alienazioni del diritto : Sul plusvalore sociale del dodicesimo camello. In: Annamaria Rufino und Gunther Teubner, Il diritto possibile: Funzioni e prospettive del medium giuridico. Guerini, Milano, 2005, 93-130.
This paper expands on the concept of legal machine which was presented first at IRIS 2011 in Salzburg. The research subjects are (1) the creation of institutional facts by machines, and (2)
multimodal communication of legal content to humans. Simple examples are traffic lights and vending machines. Complicated examples are computer-based information systems in organisations, form proceedings workflows, and machines which replace officials in organisations. The actions performed by machines have legal importance and draw legal consequences. Machines similarly as humans can be imposed status-functions of legal actors. The analogy of machines with humans is in the focus of this paper. Legal content can be communicated by machines and can be perceived by all of our senses. The content can be expressed in multimodal languages: textual, visual, acoustic, gestures, aircraft manoeuvres, etc. The concept of encapsulatation of human into machine is proposed. Herein humanintended actions are communicated through the machine’s output channel. Encapsulations can be compared with deities and mythical creatures that can send gods’ messages to people through the human mouth. This paper also aims to identify law production patterns by machines.
The institutionalization and internationalization of shareholdings, the globalization of capital markets and the rapid development of information technologies have placed our corporate law system under increasing pressure to adapt to the ever changing requirements of the market. For this reason, in May 2000, the German government called together a group of industrialists, representatives of shareholder associations and institutional investors, trade unionists, politicians and scholars to form an expert Panel with the task of reviewing the German corporate governance system. This Government Panel on Corporate Governance prepared a questionnaire on key issues in the field, and solicited responses and input from numerous national and international experts and institutions. In July 2001, the Commission presented its 320 page report (available at www.ottoschmidt. de/corporate_governance.htm) to the German Chancellor. The Report made nearly 150 recommendations for amendments or changes to existing provisions of German law and also set forth proposals on how the German corporate governance system should be further developed in order to maintain a normative framework that is suitable and attractive not only for companies, but also for domestic and foreign investors. In order that the Panel s proposals may receive careful consideration from a diverse audience, it seems very useful to keep a wider public informed of the Panel s recommendations. Therefore, also on behalf of the Panel, I very much appreciate that the international law firm Shearman & Sterling has taken the initiative to have the summary of the Panel s recommendations translated into English.
We are students, scholars, and academics at European universities who unequivocally condemn the violent attacks on student and faculty members of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi that took place on 5th January 2020. We see the attacks as part of the larger pattern of systematic violence that is being consistently inflicted on students across Indian universities for the past month by the Indian police in collusion with far-right organisations. We are shocked by the proclivity of the Indian State to turn upon its own students, and by the failure of universities and other academic institutions to protect their members; the cases are too many to be all listed here, but along with JNU, this inhumane orchestration of violence has extended to Aligarh Muslim University, Banaras Hindu University in Uttar Pradesh, and Jamia Millia Islamia in New Delhi. ...
Until three years ago, ICT Technologies represented a main “subordinate clause” within the “grammar” of Participatory Budgeting (PB), the tool made famous by the experience of Porto Alegre and today expanded to more than 1400 cities across the planet. In fact, PB – born to enhance deliberation and exchanges among citizens and local institutions – has long looked at ICTS as a sort of “pollution factor” which could be useful to foster transparency and to support the spreading of information but could also lead to a lowering in quality of public discussion, turning its “instantaneity” into “immediatism,” and its “time-saving accessibility” into “reductionism” and laziness in facing the complexity of public decision-making through citizens’ participation. At the same time, ICTs often regarded Participatory Budgeting as a tool that was too-complex and too-charged with ideology to cooperate with. But in the last three years, the barriers which prevented ICTs and Participatory Budgeting to establish a constructive dialogue started to shrink thanks to several experiences which demonstrated that technologies can help overcome some “cognitive injustices” if not just used as a means to “make simpler” the organization of participatory processes and to bring “larger numbers” of intervenients to the process. In fact, ICTs could be valorized as a space adding “diversity” to the processes and increasing outreach capacity. Paradoxically, the experiences helping to overcome the mutual skepticism between ICTs and PB did not come from the centre of the Global North, but were implemented in peripheral or semiperipheral countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Brazil, Dominican Republic and Portugal in Europe), sometimes in cities where the “digital divide” is still high (at least in terms of Internet connections) and a significant part of the population lives in informal settlements and/or areas with low indicators of “connection.” Somehow, these experiences were able to demystify the “scary monolithicism” of ICTs, showing that some instruments (like mobile phones, and especially the use of SMS text messaging) could grant a higher degree of connectivity, diffusion and accountability, while other dimensions (which could risk jeopardizing social inclusion) could be minimized through creativity. The paper tries to depict a possible panorama of collaboration for the near future, starting from descriptions of some of the above mentioned “turning-point” experiences – both in the Global North as well as in the Global South.