Volume 8 of the EYIEL focuses on the external economic relations of the European Union as one of the most dynamic political fields in the process of European integration. The first part of this volume analyses the recent controversial questions of the external economic relations of the Union, dealing with the complexity of mixed agreements, transparency and legitimacy issues as well as recent proposals in relation to Investor-State-Dispute Settlement, the Trade Defence Instruments and the implications of the "Brexit" in this context. The second part of EYIEL 8 addresses ongoing bilateral and multilateral negotiations of the EU with China, Japan, Australia, Canada and Taiwan. Moreover, the third part deals with the EU in international organisations and institutions, in particular the recent institutional aspects of the EU-UN relationship, representation in the IMF as well as WTO jurisprudence involving the EU in 2015. The volume concludes with reviews of recent books in international economic law.

Using original empirical data and critiquing existing research, Samia Bano explores the experience of British Muslim woman who use Shari'ah councils to resolve marital disputes. She challenges the language of community rights and claims for legal autonomy in matters of family law showing how law and community can empower as well as restrict women.

""Playing it Safe, How the Supreme Court Sidesteps Hard Cases and Stunts the Development of Law" is a book that will not only entertain but also remind us of the fact that many of the Court's most interesting decisions come not in its published written opinions addressing the merits of a case, but in their decisions not to hear a case based on purely procedural rationales. Recommended."
-- "New York Law Journal"

"Kloppenberg has provided the first sustained attack on the long-standing judicial practice of avoidance in at least a generation...her argument deserves careful attention."
--Cass Sunstein," New Republic," 10/01

It is one of the unspoken truths of the American judicial system that courts go out of their way to avoid having to decide important and controversial issues. Even the Supreme Courtfrom which the entire nation seeks guidancefrequently engages in transparent tactics to avoid difficult, politically sensitive cases.

"[A] well-informed book."
-- "Choice"

The Court's reliance on avoidance has been inconsistent and at times politically motivated. For example, liberal New Deal Justices, responding to the activism of a conservative Court, promoted deference to Congress and the presidency to protect the Court from political pressure. Likewise, as the Warren Court recognized new constitutional rights, conservative judges and critics praised avoidance as a foundational rule of judicial restraint. And as conservative Justices have constituted the majority on the Court in recent years, many liberals and moderates have urged avoidance, for fear of disagreeable verdicts.

By sharing the stories of litigants who struggled unsuccessfully to raise before theSupreme Court constitutional matters of the utmost importance from the 1970s-1990s, Playing it Safe argues that judges who fail to exercise their power in hard cases in effect abdicate their constitutional responsibility when it is needed most, and in so doing betray their commitment to neutrality. Lisa Kloppenberg demonstrates how the Court often avoids socially sensitive cases, such as those involving racial and ethnic discrimination, gender inequalities, abortion restrictions, sexual orientation discrimination, and environmental abuses. In the process, the Court ducks its responsibility to check the more politically responsive branches of government when "majority rule" pushes the boundaries of constitutional law. The Court has not used these malleable doctrines evenhandedly: it has actively shielded states from liability and national oversight, and aggressively expanded standing requirements to limit the role of federal courts.

Whilst paying lip service to the importance of public access to court proceedings and its corollary of unfettered media reporting,a trawl through common law jurisdictions reveals that judges and legislators have been responsible for substantial inroads into the ideal of open justice. Outside of the US, judges and legislators have long subordinated media freedom to report and comment upon matters relating to the administration of justice in order to safeguard the fairness of individual proceedings, public confidence in the administration of justice more generally or even individual privacy concerns. The subject matter of this book is a comparative treatment of constitutional protection for open justice. Focusing on developments in the legal systems of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and Australia, the monograph draws upon the constitutionalization of expression interests across the common law world to engage in a much needed re-assessment of the basis and extent of permissible restraints on speech.

The Injustice of Justice is a purposeful book designed to introduce the public as well as the profession to an alternate method of policing with a whole-community and responsibility-based approach. Don has written the book from the perspective of a businessman whose interest and subsequent involvement stems first from his employee, then a compassionate and compelling group of individuals in law enforcement and our justice system. Here are a few responses to the book: "Equal protection under the law is one of the basic premises of the American justice system. Yet many Americans feel this concept is not only elusive, but virtually impossible to attain. It's something we hope for and work to make real. Chief Grady has given us a practical approach to seeking justice while at the same time practicing reality. His book should be a must read for courses in community-police relations and for individuals and groups who want to better understand how our criminal justice system works, what good policing is, what changes are needed, and how we can all engage in making it happen." "Donald Grady has presented a policing model that is way ahead of its time. This book is a telling look at the inadequacies of our criminal justice system from a criminal justice insider..".".a must-read for anyone interested in innovative law enforcement strategies and forging stronger police-community relations. In sharing his successful leadership methods and progressive ideas, Chief Donald Grady has provided a valuable service."

Multi-party litigation is a world-wide legal process, and the class action device is one of its best-known manifestations. As a means of providing access to justice and achieving judicial economies, the class action is gaining increasing endorsement - particularly given the prevalence of mass consumerism of goods and services, and the extent to which the activities and decisions of corporations and government bodies can affect large numbers of people. The primary purpose of this book is to compare and contrast the class action models that apply under the federal regimes of Australia and the United States and the provincial regimes of Ontario and British Columbia in Canada. While the United States model is the most longstanding, there have now been sufficient judicial determinations under each of the studied jurisdictions to provide a constructive basis for comparison. In the context of the drafting and application of a workable class action framework, it is apparent that similar problems have been confronted across these jurisdictions, which in turn promotes a search for assistance in the experience and legal analysis of others. The book is presented in three Parts. The first Part deals with the class action concept and its alternatives, and also discusses and critiques the stance of England where the introduction of the opt-out class action model has been opposed. The second Part focuses upon the various criteria and factors governing commencement of a class action (encompassing matters such as commonality, superiority, suitability, and the class representative). Part 3 examines matters pertaining to conduct of the action itself (such as becoming a class member, notice requirements, settlement, judgments, and costs and fees). The book is written to have practical utility for a wide range of legal practitioners and professionals, such as: academics and students of comparative civil procedure and multi-party litigation; litigation lawyers who may use the reference materials cited to the benefit of their own class action clients; and those charged with law reform who look to adopt the most workable (and avoid the unworkable) features in class action models elsewhere.

Each national report addresses, among other things, the following issues:
- the sources of law and general principle of the law of evidence
- the means of evidence
- the role of the judge and the parties in the evidence procedure
- the evaluation of evidence
- the production of evidence
- the registration of produced evidence
- the possibilities to admit new evidence or to renew evidence in appeal proceedings.

An inside look at crisis management in the 21st century, Feeding Frenzy tells the story of two companies at war with each other, and of the trial lawyers determined to keep the conflict on the front pages. The Ford-Firestone tire crisis was the biggest business story of 2000-2001. Deadly and mysterious rollover accidents of Ford Explorers with failing Firestone tires took a toll of more than 270 lives in the U.S. and at least 100 more in Venezuela and other hot-climate countries. In compelling narrative, Feeding Frenzy provides a richer case study than can be found in other books on crisis communications. The reader climbs into the front seat for an eventful ride with the Ford PR team, as the automaker tries to understand what's causing the maddening accidents. Firestone's recall of millions of tires does nothing to abate unprecedented scrutiny from international media, safety advocates and an angry U.S. Congress. All the while, trial lawyers are leaking a new inflammatory document virtually every day to journalists competing with one another to break the next big story in this epic crisis. Jon Harmon is a chief communications officer with experience in all facets of reputation management. Over a 23-year career at Ford Motor Company, Harmon served in numerous roles requiring adroit media relations. He was Ford's chief spokesman during national labor negotiations with the UAW, and for many of Ford's high-profile legal cases and safety issues. As head of public relations for Ford Truck, Harmon was thrust into defending the Ford Explorer throughout the epic Ford-Firestone tire crisis. Harmon is the author of the Force for Good Communications blog for "aspirational public relations" at www.forceforgoodcom.com.

This volume explores the theory and practice of sentencing in England and Wales, exploring issues such as the role of previous convictions, offender remorse and sentencing female offenders, as well as drawing upon a new and unique source of data from the Crown courts.

The debate over race in this country has of late converged on the contentious issue of affirmative action. Although the Supreme Court once supported the concept of racial affirmative action, in recent years a majority of the Court has consistently opposed various affirmative action programs.

The Law of Affirmative Action provides a comprehensive chronicle of the evolution of the Supreme Court's involvement with the racial affirmative action issue over the last quarter century. Starting with the 1974 "DeFunis v. Odegaard" decision and the 1978" Bakke" decision, which marked the beginnings of the Court's entanglement with affirmative action, Girardeau Spann examines every major Supreme Court affirmative action decision, showing how the controversy the Court initially left unresolved in DeFunis has persisted through the Court's 1998-99 term.

Including nearly thirty principal cases, covering equal protection, voting rights, Title VII, and education, The Law of Affirmative Action is the only work to treat the Court decisions on racial affirmative action so closely, tracing the votes of each justice who has participated in the decisions. Indispensable for students and scholars, this timely volume elucidates reasons for the 180 degree turn in opinion on an issue so central to the debate on race in America today.

What should be the primary goals of a judicial appointments system, and how much weight should be placed on diversity in particular? Why is achieving a diverse judiciary across the UK taking so long? Is it time for positive action? What role should the current judiciary play in the appointment of our future judges? There is broad agreement within the UK and other common law countries that diversity raises important questions for a legal system and its officials, but much less agreement about the full implications of recognising diversity as an important goal of the judicial appointments regime. Opinions differ, for example, on the methods, forms, timing and motivations for judicial diversity. To mark the tenth anniversary of the creation of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) in England and Wales, this collection includes contributions from current and retired judges, civil servants, practitioners, current and former commissioners on the JAC and leading academics from Australia, Canada, South Africa and across the UK. Together they provide timely and authoritative insights into past, current and future debates on the search for diversity in judicial appointments. Topics discussed include the role and responsibility of independent appointment bodies; assessments of the JAC's first ten years; appointments to the UK Supreme Court; the pace of change; definitions of 'merit' and 'diversity'; mandatory retirement ages; the use of ceiling quotas; and the appropriate role of judges and politicians in the appointments process.

This unique empirical study investigates how the method of judicial selection significantly affects state-supreme-court policies in several important areas of law-business, criminal procedure, and family law. After examining different theories and surveying the research about judicial selection, this comparative study of policies in six states-Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, West Virginia-challenges current assumptions. The author finds that appointed judges prefer the interests of the individual over those of the state in criminal-procedure cases and are the most innovative in business law; that elected judges prefer the interests of the state over the individual; and that legislatively selected judges acquiesce to the policy preferences of other branches of government and are the most inactive in terms of policy initiation. For students and teachers in law, political science, and history; for lawyers and judges; for interest groups concerned about state policy; and for policymakers and other professionals concerned with American government and public administration.

This book is a collection of papers that address a fundamental question: What is the role of civil justice and civil procedure in the various national traditions in the contemporary world? The book presents striking differences among a range of countries and legal traditions, but also points to common trends and open issues. It brings together prominent experts, professionals and scholars from both civil and common law jurisdictions. It represents all main legal traditions ranging from Europe (Germanic and Romanic countries, Scandinavia, ex-Socialist countries) and Russia to the Americas (North and South) and China (Mainland and Hong Kong). While addressing the main issue the goals of civil justice the book discusses the most topical concerns regarding the functioning and efficiency of national systems of civil justice. These include concerns such as finding the appropriate balance between accurate fact-finding and the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, the processing of hard cases and the function of civil justice as a specific public service. In the mosaic of contrasts and oppositions special place is devoted to the continuing battle between the individualistic/liberal approach and the collectivist/paternalistic approach the battle in which, seemingly, paternalistic tendencies regain momentum in a number of contemporary justice systems."

How are common interests protected in international dispute settlement? What is the role of different courts and tribunals? Why is the case law on common interests (in)consistent? Do we need more consistency for a better protection of common interests? Common Interests in International Litigation provides answers to questions that arise in international litigation as a result of an increasing recognition of common interests in this field and an ever-expanding network of specialised judicial bodies.Common Interests in International Litigation studies the case law of a number of international courts, focusing on international litigation concerning natural resource exploitation. This is a theme closely linked to a number of common interests, one which has been considered by a number of courts dealing with human rights, international security, international trade, international investment, the law of the sea, and more.This study aims to bring together the case law of these diverse judicial bodies to develop a common approach to common interests in international litigation. In contrast to previous studies that have focused on the approach to common or public interests in distinct legal regimes, this book offers an overview of the issue traversing traditional boundaries between legal regimes. It is therefore of particular interest to practitioners of international law and scholars specialising in the field seeking to broaden their horizons, and essential reading to all those interested in the enforcement of common interests at the international level.

The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce has become an important forum for international commercial arbitration, with parties from more than 30 countries, especially Western European countries and increasingly Russia, other Eastern European Countries, and China. The author offers practitioners several background chapters on commercial arbitration in Sweden and a detailed analysis of each section of the Swedish Arbitration Act (SAA).
This is a ready-reference handbook analyzing Swedish arbitration- the SAA, the Rules, and cases-and also includes references and commentary with respect to international commercial arbitration in general. The author's intention is to help practitioners "in search of rapid guidance regarding the interpretation of a particular provision or who wish to solve a practical problem."
"This Third Edition of Commercial Arbitration in Sweden provides us all with a valuable and up-to-date understanding of the Swedish system in operation, and a comprehensive commentary on the SCC Rules, both new and existing. World business has the means, through this work, to see why Sweden and Stockholm are good choices for their international arbitrations."-- ? Phillip Capper, Head of International Arbitration, Lovells; Nash Professor of Engineering Law, King's College, University of London; former Chairman of the Faculty of Law, University of Oxford

While evidence-based policy is an emerging rhetoric of the desire by and for governments to develop policies based on the best available evidence, drug policy is an area where particular challenges abound. This book is a detailed and comprehensive examination of the contours of drug policy development through the consideration of the particular roles of science, media, and interest groups. Using Belgium as the primary case-study, supplemented by insights gathered from other countries, the author contributes to a richer understanding of the science-policy nexus in the messy, real-world complexities of drug policy. Change or Continuity in Drug Policy: The Roles of Science, Media, and Interest Groups is the first book to bring together policy and media theories, knowledge utilisation models, and public scholarship literature. As such, the book provides unique insights relevant to aspects of change or continuity in drug policies in Europe and beyond. This book will be of great value to undergraduate and graduate students, as well as to academics, practitioners and policymakers with interest in the science-policy nexus with a particular focus on the drug policy domain.

An American Dilemma examines the issue of capital punishment in the United States as it conflicts with the nation's obligations under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. In a number of high profile cases, foreign nationals have been executed after being denied their rights under the Vienna Convention. The International Court of Justice has ruled against the United States, but individual states have chosen to defy international law. The Supreme Court has not resolved the question of legal remedies for such breaches.

Dalton combines the scholarly literature on public law and judicial impact with recent studies of policy implementation at the state level. He emphasizes the underlying constitutional, organizational, psychological, and political factors that shape public policy outcomes, arguing that a sound grasp of these factors can lead to an understanding of the gap between theory and practice in democratic politics. He examines the historical development and revision of the U.S. Supreme Court civil liberties rulings from the 1960s to the early 1980s as well as executive and congressional policy to regulate criminal records privacy. He also underscores the importance of the intergovernmental context in which state officials act as both leaders and intermediaries in the implementation of national policies. Dalton then combines these elements of analysis into a general theory of legitimation in order to render the significance of criminal justice policy for the American political system understandable as a whole.

It often seems today that no dispute is barred from resolution by arbitration. Even the fundamental question of whether a dispute falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of a judicial body may itself be arbitrable. Arbitrability is thus an elusive concept; yet a systematic study of it, as this book shows, yields innumerable guidelines and insights that are of substantial value to arbitral practice. Although the book takes the form of a collection of essays, it is designed as a comprehensive commentary on practical issues that emerge from the idea of arbitrability. Fifteen leading academics and practitioners from Europe and the United States each explore different facets of arbitrability always with a perspective open to international developments and comparative evaluation of standards. The presentation falls into two parts: in the first the focus is on the general features of arbitrability, its rationale and the laws applicable to it. In the second, arbitrability is specifically examined in the context of administrative, criminal, corporate, IP, financial, commercial, and criminal law This book has its origins in an International Conference on Arbitrability held at Athens in September 2005. Seven papers presented there are here reviewed and updated, and nine others are added. The subject of the book - arbitrability - is one that is much talked about, but seldom if ever given the in-depth treatment presented here. Arbitrators and other practitioners in the field will welcome the way the analysis moves logically from theory to practice regarding every issue, and academics will recognize a definitive treatment of arbitrability as understood and applied in the settlement of disputes today.

This work provides an analysis of how foreign law should be pleaded and dealt with in the litigation process of another country. What weight should the trial court give to the relevant foreign law, and how should it decide what the foreign law actually is? The way foreign law is procedurally treated in court indicates to a certain extent the degree of tolerance of a legal system towards foreign ideas. The book compares how these issues are handled in different national systems, with particular focus upon civil litigation rules in the US, UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium.

Throughout history, there has been conflict and the clashing of ideas. Although this has assisted in creating political and societal structures, it has also led to civil unrest, cases of severe discord, and war. Political Mediation in Modern Conflict Resolution: Emerging Research and Opportunities is a critical scholarly resource that examines the pursuit of peace in global civil war and conflict through the use of mediation. Featuring coverage on a broad range of topics, such as intercultural communication, social psychology, and conflict theory, this publication is geared towards academicians, students, and researchers seeking relevant and current research on governmental approaches to pursuing peace in instances of conflict and strife.

Is the American judiciary still the least dangerous branch, as Alexander Hamilton and legal scholar Alexander Bickel characterized it? Unlike legislatures or administrative agencies, courts do not make policy so much as direct and redirect policy as it is implemented. The judicial contribution to policymaking involves the infusion of constitutional rights into the realm of public policy, and as the government has grown, the courts have become more powerful from doing more and more of this. Powers and Rothman explore the impact of the federal courts, providing a brief account of the development of constitutional law and an overview of the judiciary's impact in six controversial areas of public policy.

Busing

Affirmative action

Prison reform

Mental health reform

Procedural reforms in law enforcement

Electoral redistricting

In each of these areas, the authors review significant cases that bear on the particular policy, exploring the social science evidence to assess the impact of the courts on policies--and the consequences of that intervention. Powers and Rothman conclude that judicial intervention in public policy has often brought about undesirable consequences, sometimes even for the intended beneficiaries of government intervention.