比较英格兰、威尔士和意大利在新冠肺炎疫情期间单方面修改业务合同条款的法律。

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Liverpool Law Review Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-05 DOI:10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2
Bandar Sharar
{"title":"比较英格兰、威尔士和意大利在新冠肺炎疫情期间单方面修改业务合同条款的法律。","authors":"Bandar Sharar","doi":"10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study compares the mechanisms through which employers in England, Wales and Italy may be legally entitled to unilaterally vary the terms of their employment contracts due to the coronavirus pandemic and developing a taxonomy, through which a meaningful side-by-side comparison of these very different jurisdictions can be constructed. To attain the core purpose of this research, the study relied on the comparative legal research method. Despite the fundamental differences between the employment law regimes of the three countries; the mechanisms through which employers from these jurisdictions can vary the terms of their employment relationships in response to COVID-19 fall into one of these categories, force majeure mechanisms; flexibility mechanisms; hardship mechanisms or mechanisms facilitating bilateral variations tantamount to unilateral variations. The study concluded that there are fundamental differences between the employment law regimes that operate respectively in England and Wales and in Italy. England and Wales is a common law jurisdiction, whereas Italy is a civil law jurisdiction; Italy's labour market is significantly more tightly regulated than England's; in England and Wales, the employment contract regulates the employment relationship, whereas in Italy the individual employment.</p>","PeriodicalId":42661,"journal":{"name":"Liverpool Law Review","volume":" ","pages":"465-483"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the laws of England, Wales and Italy Relating to the Unilateral Modification for the Terms of Operational Contract during the COVID-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Bandar Sharar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study compares the mechanisms through which employers in England, Wales and Italy may be legally entitled to unilaterally vary the terms of their employment contracts due to the coronavirus pandemic and developing a taxonomy, through which a meaningful side-by-side comparison of these very different jurisdictions can be constructed. To attain the core purpose of this research, the study relied on the comparative legal research method. Despite the fundamental differences between the employment law regimes of the three countries; the mechanisms through which employers from these jurisdictions can vary the terms of their employment relationships in response to COVID-19 fall into one of these categories, force majeure mechanisms; flexibility mechanisms; hardship mechanisms or mechanisms facilitating bilateral variations tantamount to unilateral variations. The study concluded that there are fundamental differences between the employment law regimes that operate respectively in England and Wales and in Italy. England and Wales is a common law jurisdiction, whereas Italy is a civil law jurisdiction; Italy's labour market is significantly more tightly regulated than England's; in England and Wales, the employment contract regulates the employment relationship, whereas in Italy the individual employment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":42661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Liverpool Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"465-483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Liverpool Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/6/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liverpool Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-021-09283-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究比较了英格兰、威尔士和意大利的雇主因冠状病毒大流行而在法律上有权单方面改变雇佣合同条款的机制,并制定了一种分类法,通过这种分类法,可以对这些截然不同的司法管辖区进行有意义的并排比较。为了达到本研究的核心目的,本研究采用了比较法学的研究方法。尽管这三个国家的就业法律制度存在根本差异;这些司法管辖区的雇主为应对COVID-19而改变雇佣关系条款的机制属于这些类别之一,即不可抗力机制;灵活性机制;困难机制或促进双边变化的机制等同于单边变化。研究得出的结论是,分别在英格兰、威尔士和意大利实施的就业法律制度存在根本差异。英格兰和威尔士是普通法管辖区,而意大利是民法管辖区;意大利的劳动力市场监管明显比英国严格;在英格兰和威尔士,雇佣合同规范雇佣关系,而在意大利,个人雇佣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing the laws of England, Wales and Italy Relating to the Unilateral Modification for the Terms of Operational Contract during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The study compares the mechanisms through which employers in England, Wales and Italy may be legally entitled to unilaterally vary the terms of their employment contracts due to the coronavirus pandemic and developing a taxonomy, through which a meaningful side-by-side comparison of these very different jurisdictions can be constructed. To attain the core purpose of this research, the study relied on the comparative legal research method. Despite the fundamental differences between the employment law regimes of the three countries; the mechanisms through which employers from these jurisdictions can vary the terms of their employment relationships in response to COVID-19 fall into one of these categories, force majeure mechanisms; flexibility mechanisms; hardship mechanisms or mechanisms facilitating bilateral variations tantamount to unilateral variations. The study concluded that there are fundamental differences between the employment law regimes that operate respectively in England and Wales and in Italy. England and Wales is a common law jurisdiction, whereas Italy is a civil law jurisdiction; Italy's labour market is significantly more tightly regulated than England's; in England and Wales, the employment contract regulates the employment relationship, whereas in Italy the individual employment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Liverpool Law Review is a tri-annual journal of contemporary domestic, European and international legal and social policy issues. The Journal aims to provide articles, commentaries and reviews across a wide range of theoretical and practical legal and social policy matters - including public law, private law, civil and criminal justice, international law, ethics and legal theory. The Journal has many international subscribers and regularly publishes important contributions from the U.K. and abroad. Articles and commentaries are published with sufficient speed to ensure that they are truly current.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信