Who Takes the Lead?: Comparative Insights on Arbitrability, the Delegation Clause, and the Supreme Court of the United States

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the possible implications emerging from a U.S. Supreme Court decision on arbitrability and the delegation clause

In praise of reconciliation: the in-court settlement as a global outreach for appropriate dispute resolution

A sense of crisis in the administration of civil justice is widespread. Whether the typical difficulties faced by many countries unfold in excessive costs and delays, they have stark implications for the effectiveness of the procedural systems and ac- cess to justice. Several new institutions evolved to deal with this state of crisis. Amongst them, the judicially-led settlement, which has the peculiarity of being an alternative tool, despite being performed in the courtroom, made inroads world- wide. However, the pro-adjudication rhetoric raised and continue to raise severe qualms of parties’ coercion and judicial partiality resulting from the judge’s dual role as conciliator and decider. This Article deals with the matter by aiming for a triple result. First, it is intended to show how the general trend toward in-court settlement highlights the urgency of embodying a new philosophy of distributive justice in civil procedure at a global level. To this effect, rather than securing only substantive justice, the justice systems need to be devoted to dealing with cases justly, equally, and proportionally. Secondly, it will show how advocating settle- ment does not necessarily mean an efficiency-based claim. On the contrary, it rep- resents a plea for “justice” by resulting in quality-oriented outcomes. Lastly, draw- ing from the repository of the Continental European civil procedure rules, it will sketch the proper tools to prevent the judges’ promotion of settlement from flowing into an indirectly forced settlement and negatively impacting their impartiality. The relevant outcomes will show how judicially-led settlement represents, at a global level, a form of appropriate (rather than alternative) dispute resolution method

In Praise of Reconciliation: the In-Court Settlement as a Global Outreach for Appropriate Dispute Resolution

A sense of crisis in the administration of civil justice is widespread. Whether the typical difficulties faced by many countries unfold in excessive costs and delays, they have stark implications for the effectiveness of the procedural systems and access to justice. Several new institutions evolved to deal with this state of crisis. Amongst them, the judicially-led settlement, which has the peculiarity of being an alternative tool, despite being performed in the courtroom, made inroads worldwide. However, the pro-adjudication rhetoric raised and continue to raise severe qualms of parties’ coercion and judicial partiality resulting from the judge’s dual role as conciliator and decider. This Article deals with the matter by aiming for a triple result. First, it is intended to show how the general trend toward in-court settlement highlights the urgency of embodying a new philosophy of distributive justice in civil procedure at a global level. To this effect, rather than securing only substantive justice, the justice systems need to be devoted to dealing with cases justly, equally, and proportionally. Secondly, it will show how advocating settlement does not necessarily mean an efficiency-based claim. On the contrary, it represents a plea for “justice” by resulting in quality-oriented outcomes. Lastly, drawing from the repository of the Continental European civil procedure rules, it will sketch the proper tools to prevent the judges’ promotion of settlement from flowing into an indirectly forced settlement and negatively impacting their impartiality. The relevant outcomes will show how judicially-led settlement represents, at a global level, a form of appropriate (rather than alternative) dispute resolution method

Is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19(b) Too Discretionary?

The courts are entrusted with the implementation of required joinder of parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. Indeed, the courts have substantial discretion to determine, under the considerations listed in Rule 19(b), whether to continue the litigation without the person who should be joined in pending litigation or to dismiss the action because such a person cannot be joined. Therefore, the courts are asked to weigh the factors under Rule 19(b) and recognize that one factor can be more important than others in a given case or other factors not listed in Rule 19(b) can be important in a particular case. The exercise of this discretionary power is crucial in understanding when the required joinder of parties is actually feasible. There is a range of possibilities for how narrowly or broadly judges might exercise this power. Whether an individual judge exercises this power broadly or narrowly in a particular dispute, she always needs to wait for cases to come to her. Nevertheless, this question has deep roots in American legal tradition. The concept of judicial discretion under Rule 19(b) has gradually focused not only on the protection of the interests of absent persons as well as those already before the courts from the risk of legal or practical damage but also on the protection of public interests in an adequate—meaning, efficient, coherent, and final—judgment. The comparative analysis of Rule 19(b) and legal rules governing the required joinder of parties in Italian and German legal systems suggests some thoughts about a better way to define the judicial discretion in determining whether a person who should be joined is actually indispensable—that is, essential to dismiss the action when that person cannot be joined. According to Italian and German legal traditions, persons can be qualified as indispensable to the purpose of required joinder of parties when their interest to be joined in pending litigation is strictly embedded in the factual specificities of the case. Since the civil law tradition is rights-focused, these specificities are mainly described in terms of co-ownership of individual rights, so that the adjudication must be coherently rendered in favor of all the co-owners of a given right. Such an approach seems to be a useful means of fortifying the American doctrine of judicial discretion under Rule 19(b)

Studies of η\eta and η′\eta' production in pppp and ppPb collisions

The production of $\eta$ and $\eta'$ mesons is studied in proton-proton and proton-lead collisions collected with the LHCb detector. Proton-proton collisions are studied at center-of-mass energies of $5.02$ and $13~{\rm TeV}$, and proton-lead collisions are studied at a center-of-mass energy per nucleon of $8.16~{\rm TeV}$. The studies are performed in center-of-mass rapidity regions $2.5<y_{\rm c.m.}<3.5$ (forward rapidity) and $-4.0<y_{\rm c.m.}<-3.0$ (backward rapidity) defined relative to the proton beam direction. The $\eta$ and $\eta'$ production cross sections are measured differentially as a function of transverse momentum for $1.5<p_{\rm T}<10~{\rm GeV}$ and $3<p_{\rm T}<10~{\rm GeV}$, respectively. The differential cross sections are used to calculate nuclear modification factors. The nuclear modification factors for $\eta$ and $\eta'$ mesons agree at both forward and backward rapidity, showing no significant evidence of mass dependence. The differential cross sections of $\eta$ mesons are also used to calculate $\eta/\pi^0$ cross section ratios, which show evidence of a deviation from the world average. These studies offer new constraints on mass-dependent nuclear effects in heavy-ion collisions, as well as $\eta$ and $\eta'$ meson fragmentation.Comment: All figures and tables, along with machine-readable versions and any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://lhcbproject.web.cern.ch/Publications/p/LHCb-PAPER-2023-030.html (LHCb public pages

Fraction of χc\chi_c decays in prompt J/ψJ/\psi production measured in pPb collisions at sNN=8.16\sqrt{s_{NN}}=8.16 TeV

The fraction of $\chi_{c1}$ and $\chi_{c2}$ decays in the prompt $J/\psi$ yield, $F_{\chi c}=\sigma_{\chi_c \to J/\psi}/\sigma_{J/\psi}$, is measured by the LHCb detector in pPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=8.16$ TeV. The study covers the forward ($1.5<y^*<4.0$) and backward ($-5.0<y^*<-2.5$) rapidity regions, where $y^*$ is the $J/\psi$ rapidity in the nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass system. Forward and backward rapidity samples correspond to integrated luminosities of 13.6 $\pm$ 0.3 nb$^{-1}$ and 20.8 $\pm$ 0.5 nb$^{-1}$, respectively. The result is presented as a function of the $J/\psi$ transverse momentum $p_{T,J/\psi}$ in the range 1$<p_{T, J/\psi}<20$ GeV/$c$. The $F_{\chi c}$ fraction at forward rapidity is compatible with the LHCb measurement performed in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV, whereas the result at backward rapidity is 2.4 $\sigma$ larger than in the forward region for $1<p_{T, J/\psi}<3$ GeV/$c$. The increase of $F_{\chi c}$ at low $p_{T, J/\psi}$ at backward rapidity is compatible with the suppression of the $\psi$(2S) contribution to the prompt $J/\psi$ yield. The lack of in-medium dissociation of $\chi_c$ states observed in this study sets an upper limit of 180 MeV on the free energy available in these pPb collisions to dissociate or inhibit charmonium state formation.Comment: All figures and tables, along with machine-readable versions and any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://cern.ch/lhcbproject/Publications/p/LHCb-PAPER-2023-028.html (LHCb public pages

The Changing Landscape for Stroke\ua0Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2

Background GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non\u2013vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. Objectives This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase&nbsp;1. Methods During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients\u2019 baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation&nbsp;disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age&nbsp; 6575 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score&nbsp; 652; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc&nbsp;= 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N&nbsp;= 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusions The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in&nbsp;Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in&nbsp;Asia&nbsp;and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701

A measurement of ΔΓs\Delta \Gamma_{s}

Using a dataset corresponding to $9~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity collected with the LHCb detector between 2011 and 2018 in proton-proton collisions, the decay-time distributions of the decay modes $B_s^0 \rightarrow J/\psi \eta'$ and $B_s^0 \rightarrow J/\psi \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ are studied. The decay-width difference between the light and heavy mass eigenstates of the $B_s^0$ meson is measured to be $\Delta \Gamma_s = 0.087 \pm 0.012 \pm 0.009 \, \mathrm{ps}^{-1}$, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic.Comment: All figures and tables, along with machine-readable versions and any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://cern.ch/lhcbproject/Publications/p/LHCb-PAPER-2023-025.htm