Cambridge Law Journal最新文献_第10页

A General Right to Conscientious Exemption: Beyond Religious Privilege. By John Adenitire. [Cambridge University Press, 2020. xiv + 320 pp. Hardback £85.00. ISBN 978-1-10-847845-8.] 良心豁免的一般权利：超越宗教特权。作者：John Adenitire。【剑桥大学出版社，2020。xiv+320页。精装版85.00英镑。ISBN 978-1-10-847845-8。]

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000393

Guy Baldwin

{"title":"A General Right to Conscientious Exemption: Beyond Religious Privilege. By John Adenitire. [Cambridge University Press, 2020. xiv + 320 pp. Hardback £85.00. ISBN 978-1-10-847845-8.]","authors":"Guy Baldwin","doi":"10.1017/S0008197322000393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197322000393","url":null,"abstract":"excellently presented by Beever in Part II, can free us from the old debates in the grand jurisprudential battle discussed in Part III. This is so particularly because throughout Part III – consisting more than half of the book’s content – Beever is trying to defend one camp in the battle against the other, despite his avowal that this battle is a great waste of time. To borrow Beever’s Freudian terminology (p. 264), it almost seems that he is consciously trying to move on from the battle while unconsciously joining the battle himself. Beever’s sustained attacks on legal positivism are often vigorous and skilful. However, in deploying those attacks he draws only sparingly on Searle and adopts a methodology that is virtually indistinguishable from how jurisprudence has traditionally been practised, making good use of doctrinal legal materials (showcasing Beever’s expertise in tort law), but ultimately letting the philosopher’s own intuition do the decisive work. Beever hence demonstrates by his own practice that one can still make new contributions to the persistent jurisprudential debates, which Searle’s social philosophy has not enabled us to either resolve or dissolve.","PeriodicalId":46389,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44027361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Intricacies of Dicta and Dissent. By Neil Duxbury. [Cambridge University Press, 2021. xxv + 260 pp. Paperback £29.99. ISBN 978-1-108-79488-6.] 政令与异议的错综复杂。尼尔·达克斯伯里著。剑桥大学出版社，2021年。25 + 260页，平装本29.99英镑。ISBN 978-1-108-79488-6。)

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000356

M. Leeming

引用次数: 0

ESTABLISHING DAMAGES FOR MASS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS 确定大规模侵犯人权行为的损害赔偿

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000277

Veronika Fikfak

{"title":"ESTABLISHING DAMAGES FOR MASS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS","authors":"Veronika Fikfak","doi":"10.1017/S0008197322000277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197322000277","url":null,"abstract":"Declaration, Legality centred on an allegation that states engaging in the use of force were committing genocide through their use of force. In contrast, the claim in Ukraine is whether actions taken purportedly to prevent and punish genocide were lawful under the GC. Robinson explicitly linked this to the question of false claims of international law, pointing out that Ukraine has not asked the court a general question about Russia’s force; rather, it is arguing that Russia cannot lawfully rely on a false claim to act to prevent genocide under the Convention. The court’s Order is a clear win for Ukraine, even though Russia is highly unlikely to comply. The way in which Ukraine relies on the idea of falsity to characterise its rights – the right “not to be subject to a false claim of genocide” (at [52]) and for military action not to be “launched on a pretext of genocide” (at [68]) – is perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the case. Although the court stops short of directly embracing the idea of a right not to be subject to false claims of international law, it does conclude that Ukraine has “a plausible right not to be subject to military operations by the Russian Federation for the purpose of preventing and punishing an alleged genocide in the territory of Ukraine” (at [60]). While jurisdiction is clearly based on the existence of a dispute as to whether genocide is taking place and what actions Russia may lawfully take in response, the court nevertheless signalled that Article I GC must be carried out in good faith and in a way that is compatible with general international law. At the merits stage, it may have to grapple with what this means in practice, including what it means to make “bad faith” and pre-textual claims about law and fact as opposed to making claims that are plausible but wrong. Drawing these distinctions and characterising the impact that deception has on the validity of international legal arguments is a perennial challenge for international law, as too many past examples of unilateral force have shown.","PeriodicalId":46389,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43371669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

FALSE CLAIMS OF GENOCIDE HAVE REAL EFFECTS: ICJ INDICATES PROVISIONAL MEASURES IN UKRAINE'S PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RUSSIA 关于种族灭绝的虚假指控具有实际影响:国际法院在乌克兰对俄罗斯的诉讼中提出了临时措施

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000265

A. Sanger

{"title":"FALSE CLAIMS OF GENOCIDE HAVE REAL EFFECTS: ICJ INDICATES PROVISIONAL MEASURES IN UKRAINE'S PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RUSSIA","authors":"A. Sanger","doi":"10.1017/S0008197322000265","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197322000265","url":null,"abstract":"DAYS after the Russian invasion began, Ukraine instituted proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under the 1948 Genocide Convention (GC), arguing that Russia cannot lawfully rely on false claims of genocide to justify military action in Ukrainian territory. Russia did not appear at the oral proceedings but sent a document asserting the ICJ’s lack of jurisdiction. On 16 March 2022, the ICJ delivered its Order on Provisional Measures, akin to an injunction in national law. A 13:2 majority concluded that the court had prima facie jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the dispute, and ordered Russia to suspend its military operations, and to ensure that persons directed, supported, and/or controlled by Russia cease military operations (Judge Xue and Vice-President Gevorgian dissenting in part). By a unanimous vote, the court also required both states to refrain from actions that might aggravate, extend or otherwise make the dispute difficult to resolve. The court’s application of the law on provisional measures is relatively straightforward. What is remarkable is that, so far at least, Ukraine has been successful in converting false claims that it has breached international law into a basis for the court’s jurisdiction – a feat which raises important and difficult questions about the potential broader applicability of such jurisdictional manoeuvres, and the standards by which the court should assess whether states are acting in good faith in cases that are less clear cut than the present one. The court may indicate provisional measures only if the provisions relied upon by the applicant afford a prima facie basis on which jurisdiction to decide the dispute could be founded but it “need not satisfy itself in a definitive manner” (at [24]), leaving open the possibility that it may Cambridge Law Journal, 81(2), July 2022, pp. 217–248 © The Authors, 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge","PeriodicalId":46389,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47971859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A GAIN IS AS GOOD AS A LOSS … TO A BOUND FIDUCIARY 对受约束的受托人来说，赚了等于赔了

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000319

J. Grower

{"title":"A GAIN IS AS GOOD AS A LOSS … TO A BOUND FIDUCIARY","authors":"J. Grower","doi":"10.1017/S0008197322000319","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197322000319","url":null,"abstract":"by the parties – lower courts would do well to heed the warning. While the judgment in ZXC could be described as a “win” for privacy interests, a “general principle” or “starting point” of a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of information relating to pre-charge criminal investigations does not preclude journalists from conducting their own inquiries into a person’s alleged misconduct and reporting the outcome of those inquiries. As the trial judge, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court emphasised, the article at the centre of the proceedings in ZXC merely repeated the content of the LoR. If, instead, the article concerned ZXC’s alleged wrongdoing based on Bloomberg’s own investigations, this would have been a “distinct and separate situation” (at [78]). Given that law enforcement authorities have themselves adopted a uniform policy of not disclosing information regarding pre-charge investigations, the approach espoused by the lower courts and endorsed by the Supreme Court in ZXC is an eminently reasonable compromise between the conflicting Article 8 and 10 interests in such cases. Any contention that the decision unjustifiably curtails expression that is in the public interest ignores the very clear message from the Supreme Court that each case turns on its own facts and independent investigations by journalists may well fall outside the remit of the general rule.","PeriodicalId":46389,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48013943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

EU Private Law: Anatomy of a Growing Legal Order. By Jürgen Basedow. [Cambridge: Intersentia, 2021. cxxviii + 788 pp. Hardback €149.00. ISBN 978-1-839-70121-4.] 欧盟私法:一个成长中的法律秩序的剖析。作者:j<s:1> rgen Basedow。[剑桥:Intersentia, 2021.]cxxviii + 788页。精装本€149.00。ISBN 978-1-839-70121-4。)

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S000819732200037X

Birke Häcker

引用次数: 2

CITIZENSHIP, CHARGES AND COMMON LAW CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 公民身份、指控与普通法宪法权利

IF 1.5 2区社会学

Cambridge Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI: 10.1017/S0008197322000289

Kelly Chong Yan Chan, Edward Lui

引用次数: 0

MAINTAINING THE ELEGANT FAÇADE OF THE ACTS–OMISSIONS DISTINCTION 保持作为与不作为的区别