Findings of a major comparative study on litigation funding and costs

This policy brief, written by Dr Christopher Hodges and Professor Stefan Vogenauer of Oxford University, is published as costs and funding are assuming far greater importance as keys to evaluating and providing access to justice. The findings were drawn upon by Lord Justice Jackson in his influential Costs Review which recommended moving to American style contingency fees, a recommendation that is widely expected to be implemented by the UK coalition government. The policy brief addresses the problem of maintaining fair and equal access to justice for all, whilst controlling cost and delay, a problem of particular relevance as governments across Europe are set to impose significant cuts in public expenditure as a consequence of the current economic climate. Using data supplied by leading practitioners across the thirty-five jurisdictions, the study looks at nine case studies of categories of claim, and conducts a comparative analysis of the range of approaches taken to administering them, before setting out possible alternative approaches

Problemas de la promulgación de una constitución británica

De vez en cuando se apunta que sería mejor que Gran Bretaña contase con una constitución cuyos términos se encontrasen en un documento impreso, conocido y accesible a todos los ciudadanos. La finalidad de este artículo es considerar la cuestión de la factibilidad, o, mejor dicho, los problemas que hay que resolver si se decide promulgar una Constitución Británica. El primer problema fundamental consiste en determinar qué debería incluirse en dicha constitución, y, el segundo, decidir cómo debería elaborarse, ratificarse y modificarse esa constitución

Individually optimized multi-channel tDCS for targeting somatosensory cortex

Objective - Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuro-modulation technique that delivers current through the scalp by a pair of patch electrodes (2-Patch). This study proposes a new multi-channel tDCS (mc-tDCS) optimization method, the distributed constrained maximum intensity (D-CMI) approach. For targeting the P20/N20 somatosensory source at Brodmann area 3b, an integrated combined magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) source analysis is used with individualized skull conductivity calibrated realistic head modeling. - Methods - Simulated electric fields (EF) for our new D-CMI method and the already known maximum intensity (MI), alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) and 2-Patch methods were produced and compared for the individualized P20/N20 somatosensory target for 10 subjects. - Results - D-CMI and MI showed highest intensities parallel to the P20/N20 target compared to ADMM and 2-Patch, with ADMM achieving highest focality. D-CMI showed a slight reduction in intensity compared to MI while reducing side effects and skin level sensations by current distribution over multiple stimulation electrodes. - Conclusion - Individualized D-CMI montages are preferred for our follow up somatosensory experiment to provide a good balance between high current intensities at the target and reduced side effects and skin sensations. - Significance - An integrated combined MEG and EEG source analysis with D-CMI montages for mc-tDCS stimulation potentially can improve control, reproducibility and reduce sensitivity differences between sham and real stimulations

The Multicultural Classroom as a Comparative Law Site: A United Kingdom Perspective

This chapter studies the impact of the recent multicultural approach to comparative legal studies on comparative law teaching, with a focus on British debates and literature. I will argue that the multicultural turn of (comparative) legal teaching, reflected for example in a greater diversity of teaching techniques, a greater emphasis on minority issues and law &… disciplines, responds to a multiplicity of motivations. Pedagogically, it is a response to the increasingly diverse backgrounds of students and their differing intellectual starting-points. Pragmatically, it is a means to boost students’ employability and intellectual versality in a job market that now values “cultural awareness skills”. Finally, conceptually, it is a tool designed to unravel the pluralistic nature of law. From these diverse drivers to the multicultural turn in (comparative) legal teaching, it is possible to identify similarities with other recent trends of globalisation and internationalisation of legal education. However, this article will submit that differences remain. Having analysed these differences, I will go on to argue and reveal that in them lie the core features of a multicultural approach to legal teaching and its intrinsic connections to comparative law, as the multicultural classroom itself becomes a comparative law site

Ch.1 General Provisions, General Provisions III: Arts 1.6–1.12—Application of the PICC, Art.1.6

This commentary focuses on Article 1.6, which provides a number of broad interpretative guidelines for the interpretation and the supplementation of the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC). The provision does not purport to set forth a complete set of detailed rules and principles of contractual interpretation. It simply highlights some interpretative elements that are of particular importance in the context of international uniform law. The interpretation of a PICC article is concerned with determining whether a given set of facts falls within the scope of application of such article and therefore triggers the legal consequences spelt out in the provision. Art 1.6 outlines the international character and autonomous interpretation of the PICC, criteria of interpretation, weight of the interpretative criteria, issues within the scope of the PICC but not expressly settled by them, and ‘settling the issue’.</p

Ch.5 Content, third party rights and conditions, s.1: Content, Art.5.1.7

This commentary focuses on Article 5.1.7 of the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC) concerning the determination of contractual price. According to Art 5.1.7, where a contract does not fix or make provision for determining the price, the parties are considered, in the absence of any indication to the contrary, to have made reference to the price generally charged at the time of the conclusion of the contract for such performance in comparable circumstances in the trade concerned or, if no such price is available, to a reasonable price. This commentary discusses failure to determine the price by the parties, determination of the price according to the market price or a reasonable price, determination of the price by one of the parties, determination of the price by a third person, determination of the price with reference to external factors, and allocation of the burden of proof.</p