41,768 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The David W. Fentress Family Letters, 1856-1969
No full textTranscript of a letter by an unidentified author to David Fentress regarding sharing federal newspapers and the banning of federal newspapers in some areas. The author passes on the news of the war including the destruction of the Federal merchantmen by the Confederate fleet. He passes along world news: Russia preparing to go to War with Europe and how that could negatively affect the Confederacy. There is also speculation on the future of the war
The David W. Fentress Family Letters, 1856-1969
No full textTranscript of a letter by an unidentified author to David Fentress regarding sharing federal newspapers and the banning of federal newspapers in some areas. The author passes on the news of the war including the destruction of the Federal merchantmen by the Confederate fleet. He passes along world news: Russia preparing to go to War with Europe and how that could negatively affect the Confederacy. There is also speculation on the future of the war
Race in Brazilian Political Campaigns
No full textFaculty Advisor: David SamuelsThis research was supported by the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP).Cabrelli Rusconi, Isabella. (2024). Race in Brazilian Political Campaigns. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/262748
Duration, lawful termination and frustration of the Employment Contract
Full text linkThis chapter emphasises the pivotal role that the common law rules on the implied duration and the termination of the contract of employment play in defining the essence and nature of that institution. The claim is made that the implied common law rule treating the employment contract as indeterminate in duration provides explanatory force for the rules on classification, suspension and termination of the employment contract. Turning to the common law of termination, the chapter explains how key House of Lords and Supreme Court authorities such as Johnson, Eastwood, and Edwards do not preclude the addition of ‘just cause’ requirements to the unrestricted reasonable notice rule as a means of furnishing protection to employees falling outside the coverage of the statutory unfair dismissal regime. The chapter moves on to address other common law rules in play in respect of the termination of the employment contract, e.g. those applying in the context of termination by the employer making a payment in lieu of notice, summary dismissal by the employer, resignation and retirement by the employee and the expiry and non-renewal of a fixed-term employment contract. Reforms of these rules are suggested that pursue an ‘integrationist agenda’, i.e. an approach that is designed to gradually assimilate the common law rules with those applicable for the purposes of the unfair dismissal legislation. Proposals for a similar alignment of the common law rules of frustration with the interpretation of that conception for statutory purposes are also made. The chapter ends by exploring how the suggested reforms can be divided into those which promote substantive fairness on the one hand and those seeking to achieve procedural fairness on the other
A rule-based analysis and comparison of the case Studies
Full text linkDrawing on data derived from ten hypothetical case studies, we adopt a rule-based comparative evaluation of the company laws of twelve different jurisdictions. The ten case studies examine topics relating to directors’ duties and liabilities generally and in the context of takeovers, the protection of creditors, including the relationship between creditors and a company, and the law governing shares, shareholders’ rights and protection and the flexibility of company law. Each of the corporate law issues raised by the ten case studies are addressed by national reporters appointed in respect of the US (Delaware), UK, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Poland, Finland, Latvia, South Africa and Japan. This chapter compares and contrasts the formal company law rules recognised by each of these twelve countries as applicable in respect of the ten case studies, as well as the effects and consequences of the application of those rules. The value in the comparative assessment of the form and function of the relevant company law rules in each of the twelve jurisdictions under review lies in the additional light they can cast on four of the most enduring debates in comparative company law. These concern the propositions that:(i) the pressures exerted by the increased pace of globalisation, international competition, interest groups, and imitation will inevitably lead to the convergence of company law rules (in terms of form or function) across all jurisdictions in the world, and in particular, assimilation to the US model of corporate law and governance (“the convergence proposition”); (ii) the patterns and structures of shareholder ownership (dispersed/outsider v concentrated/insider) of public joint stock companies in a country's main stock exchange will influence the nature and strength of the shareholder protection rules applicable in that country (“the patterns of share ownership proposition”);(iii) countries have a preference for a shareholder primacy model of corporate governance over that of a stakeholder or director primacy framework (“shareholder primacy proposition”); and(iv) the civilian legal origin of a country will influence its company law rules to such an extent that it will be inferior to a country that has its origins in the common law with regard to the level of (a) investor protection, (b) financial development, (c) access to finance, (d) government ownership and regulation, (e) security of property rights and (f) contract enforcement (“the legal origins proposition”)..In this chapter, the authors seek to demonstrate what a careful analysis of the form and function of each of the legal rules operative in the twelve jurisdictions can reveal about the strength of each of these propositions. The conclusions are drawn that there is a lack of evidence for the legal origins, patterns of share ownership, and convergence propositions, but some available for the shareholder primacy one. The broader economic and legal policy implications of these findings are subsequently examined and conclusions drawn.<br/
A rule-based analysis and comparison of the case Studies
Full text linkDrawing on data derived from ten hypothetical case studies, we adopt a rule-based comparative evaluation of the company laws of twelve different jurisdictions. The ten case studies examine topics relating to directors’ duties and liabilities generally and in the context of takeovers, the protection of creditors, including the relationship between creditors and a company, and the law governing shares, shareholders’ rights and protection and the flexibility of company law. Each of the corporate law issues raised by the ten case studies are addressed by national reporters appointed in respect of the US (Delaware), UK, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Poland, Finland, Latvia, South Africa and Japan. This chapter compares and contrasts the formal company law rules recognised by each of these twelve countries as applicable in respect of the ten case studies, as well as the effects and consequences of the application of those rules. The value in the comparative assessment of the form and function of the relevant company law rules in each of the twelve jurisdictions under review lies in the additional light they can cast on four of the most enduring debates in comparative company law. These concern the propositions that:(i) the pressures exerted by the increased pace of globalisation, international competition, interest groups, and imitation will inevitably lead to the convergence of company law rules (in terms of form or function) across all jurisdictions in the world, and in particular, assimilation to the US model of corporate law and governance (“the convergence proposition”); (ii) the patterns and structures of shareholder ownership (dispersed/outsider v concentrated/insider) of public joint stock companies in a country's main stock exchange will influence the nature and strength of the shareholder protection rules applicable in that country (“the patterns of share ownership proposition”);(iii) countries have a preference for a shareholder primacy model of corporate governance over that of a stakeholder or director primacy framework (“shareholder primacy proposition”); and(iv) the civilian legal origin of a country will influence its company law rules to such an extent that it will be inferior to a country that has its origins in the common law with regard to the level of (a) investor protection, (b) financial development, (c) access to finance, (d) government ownership and regulation, (e) security of property rights and (f) contract enforcement (“the legal origins proposition”)..In this chapter, the authors seek to demonstrate what a careful analysis of the form and function of each of the legal rules operative in the twelve jurisdictions can reveal about the strength of each of these propositions. The conclusions are drawn that there is a lack of evidence for the legal origins, patterns of share ownership, and convergence propositions, but some available for the shareholder primacy one. The broader economic and legal policy implications of these findings are subsequently examined and conclusions drawn.<br/
Portrait of author David Foster at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011 /
No full textTitle from acquisitions documentation.; Part of the collection: Portraits of author David Foster at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011.; Acquired in digital format; access copy available online.; Mode of access: Online.; Photographed by a staff member of the National Library of Australia
Author David Foster with academic Jeff Doyle at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011 /
No full textTitle from acquisitions documentation.; Part of the collection: Portraits of author David Foster at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011.; Acquired in digital format; access copy available online.; Mode of access: Online.; Photographed by a staff member of the National Library of Australia
Author David Foster and academic Jeff Doyle at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011 /
No full textTitle from acquisitions documentation.; Part of the collection: Portraits of author David Foster at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 8 June 2011.; Acquired in digital format; access copy available online.; Mode of access: Online.; Photographed by a staff member of the National Library of Australia
- …
