Систематизация знаний, умений и навыков в содержании специальных предметов будущих строителей

В статье рассматривается проблема усовершенствования процесса профессиональной подготовки специалистов строительного профиля.У статті розглядається проблема вдосконалення процесу професійної підготовки фахівців будівельного профілю.The article studies the problem of perfecting the process of professional training of specialists in building construction

Explaining Judicial Assistants’ Influence on Adjudication with Principal-Agent Theory and Contextual Factors

By way of a survey among 80 Dutch administrative law judges, this paper uses principal-agent theory, as well as contextual factors, to explain judicial assistants’ influence on adjudication. Principal-agent theory has, thus far, been applied mainly to the setting of the US Supreme Court—to test the hypothesis that judicial assistants influence justices’ decisions less, as the political attitudes of assistants and justices differ more. To create a more universal theory to explain judicial assistants’ influence, we have derived five other hypotheses from principal-agent theory, which can also be used to explain judicial assistants’ influence in other court settings. As expected, we find that judges’ managerial role orientation, trust in judicial assistants and favourable risk-benefit perception of assistants’ input increase assistants’ influence. Contrary to our expectations, we did not find judges’ rule of law role orientation and relative experience of assistants to be correlated with assistants’ influence. Likewise, none of the contextual factors—panel judgments (vs. single-judge judgments), complexity of court cases and time pressure—are correlated with assistants’ influence. While three perceived risks of defection explain the influence that judges allow assistants, contextual factors do not. As such, our study shows that—when operationalised differently—principal-agent theory can be fruitfully applied to settings apart from the politicised US Supreme Court

De problematiek van sfeervervaging bij de bestuurlijk-strafrechtelijke aanpak van mensenhandel in de legale prostitutiesector

Criminal Justice: Legitimacy, accountability, and effectivit

Is the Judge or the Clerk Making the Decision?

Today, law clerks and judicial assistants have an important position in the judicial decision making process. Yet, the legitimacy of their role is regularly questioned. In the discussion on the legitimacy, it is widely assumed that judicial assistants are actively involved in adjudication and influence the outcome of judicial decisions. However, there is still little empirical evidence to substantiate these assumptions. This article contributes to the knowledge regarding the role of judicial assistants in adjudication. It does so by means of conducting an experimental survey among Dutch administrative law district court judges (N = 80). In this survey, we measure the role and influence of judicial assistants in adjudication in three different steps. We demonstrate that judicial assistants are actively involved in adjudication via sound-boarding, preparing bench memos and drafting judgments and have a self-reported and experimentally established influence on the outcome of court cases

Between Legal Certainty and Doubt

The Dutch legislature has recently (2012) altered the legislation for post-conviction revision of criminal cases. The legislature aimed to improve the balance between the competing interests of individual justice and the finality of verdicts, by making post-conviction revision more accessible. In this article we describe the current legal framework for revising cases. We also study how the revision procedure functions in practice, by looking at the types and numbers of (successful) requests for further investigations and applications for revision. We observe three challenges in finding the right balance in the revision process in the Netherlands. These challenges concern: 1) the scope of the novum criterion (which is strict), 2) the appropriate role of an advisory committee (the ACAS) in revision cases (functioning too much as a pre-filter for the Supreme Court) and, 3) the difficulties that arise due to requiring a defence council when requesting a revision (e.g., financial burdens)

Bestuurdersaansprakelijkheid in de praktijk

__Samenvatting__ Een van de mogelijkheden om de schade van wanbestuur te beperken, is het aansprakelijk stellen van de bestuurders die deze schade hebben veroorzaakt. Waar de mogelijkheid van een externe aansprakelijkheidsprocedure veelvuldig wordt benut, lijkt het veel minder vaak voor te komen dat een interne aansprakelijkheidsprocedure wordt gestart, door de rechtspersoon tegen de eigen (ex-)bestuurders. In deze bijdrage brengen wij daarom de redenen in kaart die meespelen in de beslissing om bestuurders al dan niet aansprakelijk te stellen. Inzicht in de beweegredenen van betrokkenen kan licht werpen op de werking van artikel 2:9 BW in de praktijk, en op eventuele belemmeringen die aan het aansprakelijk stellen in de weg staan. Daarmee kan een indruk ontstaan van de wijze waarop de beoogde functies van interne bestuurdersaansprakelijkheid in de praktijk worden vervuld