Die bekostigbaarheid van ’n aktiewe verdedigingsreg in die Suid?Afrikaanse strafregstelsel

Oscar Pistorius’ bail application highlighted equality concerns within criminal justice. In essence, it demonstrated an imbalance of the right to equality before the law, and its associated right to equal protection and benefit of the law, within adjectival procedure and, more specifically, pre?trial release. Whether section 9(1) rights are equally applied to bail applicants of little or no notoriety is the concern of this research. This submission is a theoretical evaluation of an accused person’s constitutional right to equality before the law in the South African criminal justice system and queries whether bail applicants, who do not have the infamy or financial resources of Pistorius, are reliant solely on the machinery of the state and therein the evidential capability of the prosecution service? The focus is on opposed applications where the burden of proof shifts to the applicant. Against this background, constitutional rights are approached in two lines of inquiry, namely: does the bail applicant enjoy equality of arms with the state where the applicant carries the onus of proof, and do economic differences between bail applicants influence constitutional equality rights? The authors conclude that economic differences have the potential to infringe constitutional guarantees in the bail process, and therein influence both equality of arms and active defence rights. The authors posit that legal aid should be extended to prevent rights infringement and that the inquisitorial nature of the South African bail process provides the ideal avenue to bridge equality concerns in criminal justice

Tracking Chart 2005 Eddie Bauer, India 02023291D

This document is part of a digital collection provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University, pertaining to the effects of globalization on the workplace worldwide. Special emphasis is placed on labor rights, working conditions, labor market changes, and union organizing.FLA_2005_Eddie_Bauer_TC_India_02023291D.pdf: 14 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Tracking Chart 2005 Nordstrom, India 02023291D

This document is part of a digital collection provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University, pertaining to the effects of globalization on the workplace worldwide. Special emphasis is placed on labor rights, working conditions, labor market changes, and union organizing.FLA_2005_Nordstrom_TC_India_02023291D.pdf: 10 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Shifts of finite type with nearly full entropy

For any fixed alphabet A, the maximum topological entropy of a Z^d subshift with alphabet A is obviously log |A|. We study the class of nearest neighbor Z^d shifts of finite type which have topological entropy very close to this maximum, and show that they have many useful properties. Specifically, we prove that for any d, there exists beta_d such that for any nearest neighbor Z^d shift of finite type X with alphabet A for which log |A| - h(X) < beta_d, X has a unique measure of maximal entropy. Our values of beta_d decay polynomially (like O(d^(-17))), and we prove that the sequence must decay at least polynomially (like d^(-0.25+o(1))). We also show some other desirable properties for such X, for instance that the topological entropy of X is computable and that the unique m.m.e. is isomorphic to a Bernoulli measure. Though there are other sufficient conditions in the literature which guarantee a unique measure of maximal entropy for Z^d shifts of finite type, this is (to our knowledge) the first such condition which makes no reference to the specific adjacency rules of individual letters of the alphabet.Comment: 33 pages, accepted by Proceedings of the London Mathematical Societ

An Enquiry Meet for the Case: Decision Theory, Presumptions, and Evidentiary Burdens in Formulating Antitrust Legal Standards

Presumptions have an important role in antitrust jurisprudence. This article suggests that a careful formulation of the relevant presumptions and associated evidentiary rebuttal burdens can provide the “enquiry meet for the case” across a large array of narrow categories of conduct confronted in antitrust to create a type of “meta” rule of reason. The article begins this project by using decision theory to analyze the types and properties of antitrust presumptions and evidentiary rebuttal burdens and the relationship between them. Depending on the category of conduct and market structure conditions, antitrust presumptions lie along a continuum from conclusive (irrebuttable) anticompetitive, to rebuttable anticompetitive, to competitively neutral, and on to rebuttable procompetitive and conclusive (irrebuttable) procompetitive presumptions. A key source of these presumptions is the likely competitive effects inferred from market conditions. Other sources are policy-based -- deterrence policy concerns and overarching policies involving the goals and premises of antitrust jurisprudence. Rebuttal evidence can either undermine the facts on which the presumptions are based or can provide other evidence to offset the competitive effects likely implied by the presumption. The evidentiary burden to rebut a presumption depends on the strength of the presumption and the availability and reliability of further case-specific evidence. These twin determinants can be combined and understood through the lens of Bayesian decision theory to explain how “the quality of proof required should vary with the circumstances.” The stronger the presumption and less reliable the case-specific evidence in signaling whether the conduct is anticompetitive versus procompetitive, the more difficult it will be for the disfavored party to satisfy the evidentiary burden to rebut the presumption. The evidentiary rebuttal burden generally is a burden of production, but also can involve the burden of persuasion, as with the original Philadelphia National Bank structural presumption, or typical procompetitive presumptions. If a presumption is rebutted with sufficient offsetting evidence to avoid an initial judgment, the presumption generally continues to carry some weakened weight in the post-rebuttal phase of the decision process. That is, a thumb remains on the scale. However, if the presumption is undermined, it is discredited and it carries no weight in the post-rebuttal decision process. The article uses this methodology to analyze various antitrust presumptions. It also analyzes the, burden-shifting rule of reason and suggests that the elements should not be rigidly sequenced in the decision process. The article also begins the project of reviewing, revising and refining existing antitrust presumptions with proposed revisions and refinements in a number of areas. The article invites other commentators to join the project by criticizing these proposals and suggesting others. These presumptions then could be applied by appellate courts and relied upon by lower court, litigants and business planners

Medtronic v. Boston Scientific: Allocating the Burden of Proof in Declaratory Judgment Actions for Patent Non-Infringement

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Medtronic, Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corporation, in which the Court will decide which party bears the burden of proof in a declaratory judgment action for patent non-infringement

Tracking Chart 2010 Columbia Sportswear Company, Vietnam

This document is part of a digital collection provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University, pertaining to the effects of globalization on the workplace worldwide. Special emphasis is placed on labor rights, working conditions, labor market changes, and union organizing.FLA_2010TrackingChart_ColumbiaSportswear.pdf: 706 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020