IUC Independent Policy Report: At the End of the End of History

The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin), and composed by Franco Bassanini (University of Rome “La Sapienza”), Guido Calabresi (Yale University), Antoine Garapon (Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice, Paris), and Tibor Varady (Central European University, Budapest). Contributors include Eugenio Barcellona (Eastern Piedmont University), Mauro Bussani (University of Trieste), Giuliano G. Castellano (Ecole Polytechnique Preg/CRG), Moussa Djir´e (Bamako University), Liu Guanghua (Lanzhou University), Golnoosh Hakimdavar (University of Turin), John Haskell (SOAS), Jedidiah J. Kroncke (Yale Law School), Andrea Lollini (Bologna University), Alberto Lucarelli (Federico II University), Boris N. Mamlyuk, (University of Turin), Alberto Monti (Bocconi University), Sergio Ariel Muro (Torquato di Tella University), Domenico Nicol`o (Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria), and Nicola Sartori (University of Michigan). The IUC Independent Policy Report argues for a radical change of perspective, capable of restoring the supremacy of the law over the economic system. It is not only about finance, nor is it only about economics or policy. In this sense a transnational set of normative principles is needed in order to establish a global legal system capable of controlling economic processes, rather than being controlled by them. Within this framework a series of policy proposals are presented in order to effectively implement a new system of global standards. The current Western standard of living is unsustainable. Should the rest share the model of development of the West, our planet will simply not be capable of resisting the growth in consumption and pollution. Within this fundamental setting of scarcity in resources, using the rhetoric of the end of history as the polar star for growth, development and ultimately happiness of the whole world is simply a cynical lie. We argue here for the beginning of a necessary process aimed at the development of a legal system that is much less about creating an effcient backbone for an exploitive economy and much more about a vision of civilization, justice and respect where the laws of nature and those of humans converge in a sustainable long-term philosophy. Principles of justice, responsibility and long term environmental protection, rather than short term economic contingency and strong interests must set the legal agenda. A new governance and bottom-up inclusive integration of knowledge-based economies (wherever located), which is crucial to the very survival of humankind, cannot happen without defning new terms of a widely accepted standard of long term justice in the transnational context, hence the urgency to conceive legitimate transnational legal structures and possibly some apparatus of “superlegality.” The report is composed of fve sections. After having presented the pitfalls of the prevailing theoretical apparatus, an alternative cultural grid upon which policy actions should be shaped is presented. In this sense several normative proposals - revisiting the key characteristics of the current system - are offered aiming at acquiring a wider perspective over the actual global crisis

IUC Independent Policy Report: At the End of the End of History: Global Legal Standards: Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

This draft was presented at the seminar, Global Standards in the 21st Century, organized by the G8 Presidency in Rome at the Ministry of Economy and Finance and Villa Madama on the 11-12th of May 2009. The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin),The IUC Independent Policy Report prepared by a group of lawyers at the International University College of Turin was presented at the meeting convened by the G8 Presidency in Rome on May 12, 2009.The IUC Independent Policy Report was drafted by the IUC Legal Standards Research Group, organized by a Steering Committee chaired by Ugo Mattei (International University College of Turin), coordinated by Edoardo Reviglio (International University College of Turin) and Giuseppe Mastruzzo (International University College of Turin), and composed by Franco Bassanini (University of Rome “La Sapienza”), Guido Calabresi (Yale University), Antoine Garapon (Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice, Paris), and Tibor Varady (Central European University, Budapest). Contributors include Eugenio Barcellona (Eastern Piedmont University), Mauro Bussani (University of Trieste), Giuliano G. Castellano (Ecole Polytechnique Preg/CRG), Moussa Djir´e (Bamako University), Liu Guanghua (Lanzhou University), Golnoosh Hakimdavar (University of Turin), John Haskell (SOAS), Jedidiah J. Kroncke (Yale Law School), Andrea Lollini (Bologna University), Alberto Lucarelli (Federico II University), Boris N. Mamlyuk, (University of Turin), Alberto Monti (Bocconi University), Sergio Ariel Muro (Torquato di Tella University), Domenico Nicol`o (Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria), and Nicola Sartori (University of Michigan). The IUC Independent Policy Report argues for a radical change of perspective, capable of restoring the supremacy of the law over the economic system. It is not only about finance, nor is it only about economics or policy. In this sense a transnational set of normative principles is needed in order to establish a global legal system capable of controlling economic processes, rather than being controlled by them. Within this framework a series of policy proposals are presented in order to effectively implement a new system of global standards. The current Western standard of living is unsustainable. Should the rest share the model of development of the West, our planet will simply not be capable of resisting the growth in consumption and pollution. Within this fundamental setting of scarcity in resources, using the rhetoric of the end of history as the polar star for growth, development and ultimately happiness of the whole world is simply a cynical lie. We argue here for the beginning of a necessary process aimed at the development of a legal system that is much less about creating an effcient backbone for an exploitive economy and much more about a vision of civilization, justice and respect where the laws of nature and those of humans converge in a sustainable long-term philosophy. Principles of justice, responsibility and long term environmental protection, rather than short term economic contingency and strong interests must set the legal agenda. A new governance and bottom-up inclusive integration of knowledge-based economies (wherever located), which is crucial to the very survival of humankind, cannot happen without defning new terms of a widely accepted standard of long term justice in the transnational context, hence the urgency to conceive legitimate transnational legal structures and possibly some apparatus of “superlegality.” The report is composed of fve sections. After having presented the pitfalls of the prevailing theoretical apparatus, an alternative cultural grid upon which policy actions should be shaped is presented. In this sense several normative proposals - revisiting the key characteristics of the current system - are offered aiming at acquiring a wider perspective over the actual global crisi

Health-related quality of life and functional changes in DMD: A 12-month longitudinal cohort study

In Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) little has been reported on the association between clinical outcome measures and patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tools. Our study evaluated the relationship between 12 month changes on the Generic Core Scales (GCS), the Multidimensional Fatigue Scale and the Neuromuscular Module of the PedsQL\u2122 with several outcome measures (6 minute walk test, North Star Ambulatory Assessment and timed items) in ambulatory DMD. Ninety-eight ambulatory DMD in a multicentric setting were included in the study. At baseline, the PedsQL\u2122 inventories correlated with almost all the functional measures On the Child Self-Report there was a significant decrease between baseline and 12 months on the PedsQL\u2122 GCS and its first domain, in parallel with the decrement in the functional outcome measures. Correlation between the 12 month changes on the PedsQL\u2122 inventories and functional measures were almost all negligible. Similar results were obtained on the Parent Proxy-Report.In conclusion, PedsQL\u2122 correlates with the level of impairment at baseline, but this does not hold true when 12 month changes are considered. Further studies comparing different tools are needed to better elucidate the complexity of the relationship between HRQOL and functional performances

Business judgment rule e interesse sociale nella \uabcrisi\ubb. L'adeguatezza degli assetti organizzativi alla luce della riforma del diritto concorsuale

La riforma del \uabdiritto della crisi e dell\u2019insolvenza\ubb del 2019 ha imposto in capo all\u2019imprenditore (collettivo e, in termini sostanzialmente analoghi, individuale) il duplice obbligo di: (i) istituire \uabassetti organizzativi adeguati\ubb \u201canche in funzione della rilevazione tempestiva della crisi dell\u2019impresa e della perdita di continuit\ue0 aziendale\u201d e di (ii) \u201cattivarsi senza indugio per l\u2019adozione e l\u2019attuazione di uno degli strumenti previsti dall\u2019ordinamento per il superamento della crisi e il recupero della continuit\ue0 aziendale\u201d (art. 2086, comma 2\ub0, cod. civ.). Tali modifiche offrono lo spunto per una rimeditazione di alcune vexatae questiones del cd. \u201cdiritto della crisi\u201d e, segnatamente: (i) il noto principio della insindacabilit\ue0 delle scelte di gestione (cd. Business Judgment Rule o BJR) subisce un qualche restringimento giuridicamente rilevante per effetto de (i nuovi obblighi di tempestiva rilevazione e reazione a) la \uabcrisi\ubb? (ii) Lo \uabinteresse della societ\ue0\ubb subisce un qualche ampliamento giuridicamente rilevante (da interesse dei soli soci profit-oriented a interesse anche dei creditori solvency-oriented) per effetto della \uabcrisi\ubb? (iii) Esiste veramente un \u201cdiritto azionario (cogente) della crisi\u201d, terza via tra il diritto societario delle imprese (azionarie) in bonis e il diritto concorsuale delle imprese (azionarie) decotte? Alla luce di un esame sistematico delle norme di diritto privato societario, di diritto privato concorsuale e di diritto penale concorsuale (le \u201cvecchie\u201d e le \u201cnuove\u201d disposizioni del cod. civ. e del codice della crisi d\u2019impresa e dell\u2019insolvenza) si perviene alla (invero piuttosto gattopardiana) conclusione che nulla sia cambiato. La BJR non subisce alcun restringimento giuridicamente rilevante per effetto della \uabcrisi\ubb: essa continua ad applicarsi tel quel fino a quando l\u2019impresa (azionaria) non sia tecnicamente \uabinsolvente\ubb o non abbia subito una \uabperdita qualificata del capitale\ubb. Egualmente, l\u2019unico interesse sociale giuridicamente rilevante continuer\ue0 a essere, anche nella \uabcrisi\ubb, quello dei soci al profitto: l\u2019imprenditore avr\ue0, anche nella \uabcrisi\ubb, il \u201cdiritto/dovere\u201d di \u201cinnovare\u201d e di \u201ccreare\u201d (su basi informative adeguate e organizzate), scegliendo sentieri non-battuti e adottando scelte contro-corrente (=orientamento al rischio). Sar\ue0 soltanto a seguito dell\u2019insolvenza o della \uabperdita qualificata del capitale\ubb che assumer\ue0 rilievo giuridicamente vincolante (con conseguente ampliamento della sfera dell\u2019interesse sociale e speculare restringimento della BJR) l\u2019interesse dei creditori a una gestione conservativa: l\u2019imprenditore avr\ue0 soltanto pi\uf9 il \u201cdiritto/dovere\u201d di attenersi scrupolosamente al sentiero ben-battuto e interamente conformista della \u201cconservazione\u201d dello status quo (=avversione al rischio). De iure condito, pertanto, il nostro ordinamento non conosce, allo stato attuale, un \u201cdiritto azionario (cogente) della crisi\u201d. Il \u201csistema\u201d delle responsabilit\ue0 gestorie si conferma binario: diritto societario delle imprese (azionarie) in bonis o diritto concorsuale delle imprese (azionarie) decotte. Tertium non datur