King's law journal : KLJ最新文献_第10页

The Potential for International Regulation of Gig Economy Issues 零工经济问题的国际监管潜力

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-05-03 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1789442

Tonia Novitz

引用次数: 4

When the Corporate Veil is Lifted: Synergies of Public Labour Institutions and Platform Workers 当企业面纱被揭开:公共劳动机构和平台工人的协同效应

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-05-03 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1784077

J. López, Alexandre de le Court

引用次数: 1

Wages and Working Time in the ‘Gig Economy’ “零工经济”中的工资和工作时间

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-05-03 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1790820

Angela C. Davies

引用次数: 0

Between Sein and Sollen of Labour Law: Civil (and Constitutional) Law Perspectives on Platform Workers 在劳工法的Sein和Sollen之间:平台工人的民事(和宪法)法律视角

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-05-03 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1789443

Vincenzo Pietrogiovanni

引用次数: 2

Playing Catch-Up but Falling Short: Regulating Work in the Gig Economy in Australia 追赶但不达标:监管澳大利亚零工经济中的工作

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-04-28 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1789433

A. Forsyth

引用次数: 5

Covid-19: Government by Decree Covid-19:政令政府

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1759398

K. Ewing

引用次数: 5

Challenging (Again) the Undemocratic Form of the Common Law: Codification as a Method of Making the Law Accessible to Citizens 挑战(再一次)普通法的不民主形式:法典化作为一种使法律为公民所用的方法

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1741150

Eva Steiner

引用次数: 0

The Declaratory Fiction 宣言式小说

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1741160

Liron Shmilovits

{"title":"The Declaratory Fiction","authors":"Liron Shmilovits","doi":"10.1080/09615768.2020.1741160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2020.1741160","url":null,"abstract":"The Greek philosopher Parmenides believed that nothing ever changed. The appearance of change, he claimed, was an illusion. His disciple, Zeno, invented a famous paradox— wherein Achilles could not outrun a tortoise —to prove that motion and change were impossible. It is said that Diogenes the Cynic responded by standing up and walking about. Unsurprisingly, the no-change theory never gained a wide following. But it was not until the development of calculus, in the seventeenth century, that the flaw in Zeno’s paradox was understood. Achilles finally won the race. And yet, Parmenides is not completely without followers these days. It is ‘trite law’, to use a trite expression, that judicial decisions have retroactive effect. By the magic of the declaratory theory, a judicial decision embodies the law as it has always been, notwithstanding previous decisions to the contrary. No change is possible. For no judge has the ability to change the law—only to declare what it has been from time immemorial. Achilles cannot outrun the tortoise. This is the paradox of the common law. On the one hand, judges abjure the declaratory theory, asserting the right to change the law. On the other hand, they say that their latest pronouncement is the law unchanged. Take Lord Hoffmann’s word for it: ‘To say that [judges] never change the law is a fiction... But... a judicial decision changes the law retrospectively... ’ The law changes, but it has always been the same. As the French say: plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. The more things change, the more","PeriodicalId":88025,"journal":{"name":"King's law journal : KLJ","volume":"74 1","pages":"59 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85645205","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}

引用次数: 0

The Aberrant Tort of Lawful Means Conspiracy? 合法手段合谋的异常侵权行为?

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1747790

Stephen Daly

引用次数: 0

Exploring the Judicial Role in a Democracy 试论司法在民主制度中的作用

King's law journal : KLJ Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/09615768.2020.1771814

Alan L. Bogg, K. Ewing

{"title":"Exploring the Judicial Role in a Democracy","authors":"Alan L. Bogg, K. Ewing","doi":"10.1080/09615768.2020.1771814","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2020.1771814","url":null,"abstract":"This volume is dedicated to an examination of the judicial role in law –making, inspired in part by the current debate about the legitimacy of the judicial role. We begin what is a lively and eclectic collection of excellent papers with a piece by Eva Steiner which goes to the heart of the matter by examining how judicial law-making through the common law can be justified in a democracy, making a powerful case for better codification of the law in the civilian style. This is followed by Mike MacNair’s paper in which he contests the idea that the judicial role can be eliminated, but asks instead how it can be better contained. Engaging with a familiar debate on the Left about the judicial role, in a historically rich and vivid analysis, Mike Macnair argues ‘that the idea of wholly eliminating either trust in judges, or the use of judicial office for political purposes, is illusory. What is possible is to reduce trust in judges’. He then shows how this would be possible. This is followed in turn by Liron Shmilovits who reverts to analytical jurisprudence to address the late Barry Nicholas’ dilemma for the lawyer, that the law is ‘something which has its own life, which exists independently of [him or her] and is merely applied by [him or her], and yet [he or she] must on occasion in practice make law’. The solution in a sophisticated paper is to re-adopt the ‘declaratory theory’ of judicial decision-making as ‘a beneficial fiction that should be retained for reasons of principle, justice and pragmatism’. In the final three papers of the collection the focus tilts from the theoretical to a consideration of the judicial role in a number of different areas of law. Gillian Douglas and Stephen Gilmore explore the ‘legitimate bounds of the judicial development of family law in England and Wales’, and in particular ‘the legitimate scope of judicial power to offer general guideline judgments ‘controlling’ the exercise of discretion’. This is an important paper, which raises questions about the similar exercise of judicial power in other fields.","PeriodicalId":88025,"journal":{"name":"King's law journal : KLJ","volume":"12 1","pages":"25 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78807900","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}

引用次数: 0