Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series最新文献

{"title":"Geographical Indications in European Union-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA): Challenges in Implementation","authors":"Q. Dao","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3094857","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3094857","url":null,"abstract":"Geographical indications (GIs) refer to signs or symbols used on products that have specific geographical origin and possess quality, reputation or distinctive characteristics linked to their place of origin. Hailed as an important tool to protect the living cultural and gastronomic heritage, GIs have been embraced with a long standing strong-form protection among European countries and have gained ground elsewhere around the world, especially in Asia-Pacific region. The European Union (EU) also asserts its entrenched pro-GI position by means of, among others, encompassing its internal benchmark of GI protection in a number of bilateral negotiations with Asian countries such as free trade agreements (FTA) with South Korea, Singapore and Vietnam. Finalized at the end of 2015, European Union-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) has marked another successive glory of the EU in line with its strategy to globally transplant its notorious sui generis protection regime of GIs. As an agriculture-intensive country and the first developing partner in Asia that has concluded an agreement with the EU, Vietnam had explicitly recognized the prominence of GIs by establishing and enabling a thorough legal and policy framework for the protection of GIs. This thesis focuses on addressing the foreseeable obstacles encountered by Vietnam when it comes to implementation of GI mandates under EVFTA in light of the relevant domestic institutional framework on GIs and the enforcement thereof by public authorities and interested economic operators. It demonstrates that within the context of EVFTA, the stance of the EU as a bigger negotiating partner with a prominent say in GIs plays a vital role in framing the content of the GIs section. Conclusively, EVFTA has set a more ambitious standard of GI protection as against what is obligated under Vietnamese national legislation. As a result, Vietnam shall possibly need to take serious account of challenges in quality management of GI-denominated products so as to make in-time adaptations in both institutional and practical terms. In addition, possible pitfalls pertaining to business awareness of GI significance, small-scale GI product groups, technical assistance and GI product market entry are also envisaged.","PeriodicalId":379196,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133511796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Numerus Clausus of Property Rights","authors":"B. Akkermans","doi":"10.4337/9781785369162.00013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785369162.00013","url":null,"abstract":"The numerus clausus of property rights is one of the fundamental principles of property law (Van Erp 2006a; Akkermans 2008). It refers to the idea that both the number and content of property rights is limited and is traditionally placed in contrast to party autonomy that reigns in contract law. Property rights are special rights because they have effect against third parties, usually against everybody else. The holder of such a right is therefore in a more powerful position than the holder of a personal right, which is a right that is only valid between two, or at least a limited category of persons. Strongly connected to the effect of property rights is the role of property law itself. Property law in many perspectives is transactional law and deals with the way in which property rights can be created, transferred and destroyed (Van Erp & Akkermans 2012). These rules are mandatory rules and can therefore not be deviated from by the parties creating, transferring or terminating property rights. However, there is an inherent tension in these mandatory rules, both regarding property rights themselves as well as the transactional rules that govern them. This tension exists in the way in which property law operates. In almost all cases, to start applying property law an initiating legal act in another field of law is needed. Most of the time this is contract law, where contracts of sale provide the seller with an obligation to transfer his or her property right, or with a contract between parties seeking to establish a property right. Alternatively, the initiating act lies in the law of marriage or succession, where either property rights become jointly held, or pass to heirs or legatees. All of these areas, contract, marital property law and succession law are characterised by the possibility for parties to give content to their legal relationship. Party autonomy therefore enables contracting parties to provide conditions and make special arrangements in terms of the functioning of property law, spouses can make a marriage contract governing the property relations between them and through a last will anyone can determine, within the limits of the applicable succession law, what happens to his or her property after he or she passes away. For centuries, therefore, parties have sought to introduce flexibility in property law to mirror the flexibility they enjoy in contract, marital property law and succession law. However, the rules of property law, especially due to the principle of numerus clausus that prescribes the available property rights and their content, prevent such flexibility. The reasons provided for this spring directly from the nature of the closed system of property rights and are therefore worth considering. Moreover, approaching numerus clausus from this perspective also sheds light on the limitations of property law and explains the rise of contract law to a considerable degree.This contribution will focus on the origins of numerus ","PeriodicalId":379196,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122333169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Compensating Victims of Bankrupted Financial Institutions: A Law and Economic Analysis","authors":"M. Faure, Robert J. Dijkstra","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1968357","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1968357","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to understand the incentive effects of existing compensation mechanisms in case of the bankruptcy of a financial institution. Design/methodology/approach - The paper uses insights of law and economics to predict the effects of compensation mechanisms on the incentives of depositors, financial institutions, financial regulators and government. Findings - The paper shows that the current compensation system in The Netherlands will not provide sufficient incentives for all stakeholders to prevent the failure of a financial institution. Adjustments to this system are necessary to improve these incentives. Original/value - The paper examines for the first time the impact of different compensation mechanisms on the incentives of multiple stakeholders. It also shows how these mechanisms influence each other regarding their incentive generating capability. These findings offer important insights for policy makers.","PeriodicalId":379196,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124845868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Penegakan Hukum Terhadap Tindak Pidana Penghinaan Melalui Media Siber Di Indonesia (Cyber Defamation Law Enforcement In Indonesia)","authors":"Anton Hendrik Samudra","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3634008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3634008","url":null,"abstract":"<b>Indonesian Abstract:</b> Di era teknologi modern ini, kita bisa melakukan segalanya di media siber, dari hal-hal sederhana hingga yang rumit. Tetapi ekspresi dan opini dapat membahayakan kepentingan hukum seseorang. Di Indonesia, Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) tergolong ketinggalan jaman untuk menanggulangi tindakan pencemaran nama baik yang dilakukan di media siber. Itu sebabnya legislator telah membentuk UU No. 11 tahun 2008, tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. Tulisan ini membahas tentang bagaimana mengintegrasikan KUHP dan UU No. 11 tahun 2008.<br><br><b>English Abstract:</b> In these modern technology era, we could do everything in cyber media, from simple things to complex ones. But our expressions and or opinions could harm somebody's legal interest/s. In Indonesia, Criminal Law Codec (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana/KUHP) is considerably obsolete to punishes act of defamation which is done in cyber media. That is why the legislator passed the Law no. 11 of 2008, about Electronic Information and Transaction. This article discusses how to integrate KUHP and Law no 11 of 2008.","PeriodicalId":379196,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122188207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Proposed Tiebreaker Rule in OECD/G20 BEPS Action 6: A Critical Examination of the Possible Motives and Means, and a Potential Alternative","authors":"Dhruv Sanghavi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2834175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2834175","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, the author critically examines the proposed tiebreaker rule in the OECD’s Final Report on Action 6 of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, and the motives behind the proposal. The author concludes by suggesting an alternative, which he argues is a more effective means to achieve the intended ends.","PeriodicalId":379196,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126926351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}