AGENDA: The Law of International Water Courses: The United Nations International Law Commission\u27s Draft Rules on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses

Colloquium organizers, committee members and/or moderators included University of Colorado School of Law professors Daniel Magraw, James N. Corbridge, Jr. and Lawrence J. MacDonnell (Director, Natural Resources Law Center). The United Nations International Law Commission has drafted new rules on the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. University of Colorado Law Professor Daniel Magraw has organized a colloquium to review these draft rules on October 18, 1991, sponsored jointly by the Panel on State Responsibility of the American Society of International Law, the University of Colorado School of Law, and the International Environmental Law Committee of the ABA\u27s Section of International Law and Practice

SLIDES: Proposed Statewide Baseline Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring Rules

Presenter: Kathryn Mutz, Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado Law School 16 slide

AGENDA: Best Practices for Community and Environmental Protection

The first Intermountain BMP Project workshop, sponsored by the Natural Resources Law Center and the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, was held in Rifle, Colorado on October 14, 2009 at the Garfield County Fairground for over 170 participants. Speakers from Federal, state and local governments, the community, industry and environmental consultants, and conservation groups focused presentations and discussion on a greater understanding of what Best Management Practices (BMPs) are appropriate to the western slope of Colorado and how they are integrated into developments

Homeward bound or bound for a home? Assessing the capacity of dementia patients to make decisions about hospital discharge: Comparing practice with legal standards

Background This article stems from a larger project which considers ways of improving assessments of capacity and judgements about best interests in connection with people with dementia admitted to acute hospitals with respect to decisions about place of residence. Aims Our aim is to comment on how assessments of residence capacity are actually performed on general hospital wards compared with legal standards for the assessment of capacity set out in the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA). Method Our findings are grounded in ethnographic ward-based observations and in-depth interviews conducted in three hospital wards, in two hospitals (acute and rehabilitation), within two NHS healthcare trusts in the North of England over a period of nine months between 2008 and 2009. Twenty-nine patient cases were recruited to the study. We also draw from broader conceptions of capacity found in domestic and international legal, medical, ethical and social science literature. Results Our findings suggest that whilst professionals profess to be familiar with broad legal standards governing the assessment of capacity under the MCA, these standards are not routinely applied in practice in general hospital settings when assessing capacity to decide place of residence on discharge from hospital. We discuss whether the criteria set out in the MCA and the guidance in its Code of Practice are sufficient when assessing residence capacity, given the particular ambiguities and complexities of this capacity. Conclusions We conclude by suggesting that more specific legal standards are required when assessing capacity in this particular context