We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
Although over seventy years have passed since the end of World War II, the issue of national socialism in the German Third Reich still remains the subject of scientific studies of a lot of scientists [...] and an enormous ideological challenge [...] in the process of the creation of culture fit for man as a spiritual and physical being, their natural and legal communities and – not infrequently – [...] fit for the personal Absolute. [...] A certain, maybe the shortest synthesis of the problems brought up in this thesis of the philosophy of law of the Third Reich was made – in cooperation with many Nazi scientists and politicians – by the minister of the Reich Hans Frank in the publication edited by him in 1937 Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht [...] where Justus Danckwerts states the following: “Therefore, it is the state and not the nation that stands at the beginning of analysis. The Führer is the representative of the nation. The nation acts through him. He is the highest war commander, politician, law maker, judge and administrator. Under no circumstances is he bound. Law stands above him which has been growing in the nation and has been tested in the fight of the most German members of the nation in the world of enemies and that is the reason why it is far stronger than any act of law and what is timeless. This law is the socialist national view of the world. It [meaning this view] created the deepest and the most certain foundation of the life order of the German nation. It is the fundamental law of the nation, the unwritten constitution which determines all desire and all activity, not only of the members of the German nation itself but of each person in general.” [...] It is here that, according to Rudolf Bechert, the seeming “necessity of socialism” has its reason for the systematic shaping and interpretation of law. From the Introduction
More...
Legal regulation of deputy interpellations in Silesian Sejm 1922—1939The material right of interpellation was assessed by Art. 14 of Constitution Act of July 15, 1920, which contained the organic statute of Silesian voivodeship (Dz.U.R.P. No 73, pos. 497) constituting that Silesian Sejm had the right to interpellate with the Silesian voivode andVoivodeship Council. On the other hand, the formal right to interpellate, and therefore the manner in which material right was realized, was to be specified by the act on the internal constitution of Silesian voivodeship. Nevertheless, advanced — especially in the 1930s — works on the bill did not lead to adopting the act on internal constituton. In such a situation the interpellating procedure was regulated by the standing orders of the Silesian Sejm: the interim orders (of October 13, 1922) and the permanent orders (of January 31, 1923), the standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm, the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm of June 17, 1930, the standing orders of the Silesian Sejm of the IV term of office, adopted on March 11, 1936. As for the material right on interpellation, one has to notice some disturbing, because against the law, transformations: the appearance of the third interpellated body, namely the Council of Ministers, in the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm, and the omission of Voivodeship Council as the interpellated body in the standing orders of March 11, 1936.The Provisions of the standing orders of the Silesian Sejm sittings, thus art. 44 of two standing orders of the sitting of the Silesian Sejm of the I term of office; art. 24 and 25 of the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm; art. 84 of the standing orders of the Silesian Sejm of the IV term of office, allow to identify three subsequent periods of interpellation, i.e. the first period: accepting the interpellation by the marshal and submitting it to the interpelled; the second period: performing the interpellation by the interpelled body and submitting a reply to the marshal; the third period: lodging the interpellation at the orders of the day of the plenary sitting, discussion, voting for acknowledging the reply (or, alternatively, for not acknowledging the reply). Submission the interpellation to the Sejm Marshal was possible after meeting three formal requirements: obtaining the minimal required support, expressed by the number of signatures on the interpellation (7 signatures in the standing orders dated October 13, 1922 and January 31, 1923; 5 signatures in the standing orders dated June 17, 1930; 3 signatures in the standing orders dated March 11, 1936); the interpellation could not contain any expressions that would violate Sejm dignity (this condition is found only in the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm); the interpellation required written form; it had to be formulated in the Polish language. Provisions concerning the latter requirement were specified by two Silesian acts, i.e. the act of January 16, 1923 on the official language on the territory of Silesian Voivodeship (Dz.U.Śl. No 5, pos. 34) and the act of July 16, 1937 on the official language of authorities and administration offices in Silesian voivodeship (Dz.U.Śl. No 14, pos. 32). Article 44 of the standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm specified that the interpellated body would submit an oral reply at the plenary sitting; whereas a written reply was to be submitted only when interpellants had given their assent to it in advance. It follows from the Provisions of the standing orders of the I and II Silesian Sejms that the interpellated body had to respond within the period no longer than three weeks. Moreover, the standing orders of the Silesian Sejm of the I term of office obliged the marshal to inquire when the interpellated body would submit their response to the interpellation. There were no orders of Silesian voivode as far the second period of interpellating was concerned. An extrasilesian source, as regards the second period of interpellating, was the circular of the Minister of the Interior No OL. 9673 dated November 23, 1926 on taking a stance on interpellations submitted before the closing of the session (Dz.Urz. MSW No 5, pos. 117), despite thefact that formally it did not regulate the interpellation procedure in the Silesian Sejm. Besides, it is difficult to find there any regulations specifying the procedure of performing interpellations, since the minister recommended not performing the interpellations submitted before the suspension of the session. Article 44 of the standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm obliged the marshal to lodge the interpellation at the order of the day of the plenary sitting within the period no longer than three weeks. Whereas article 25 of the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm specified two alternative factors of lodging the interpellation by the marshal at the order of the day, i.e. in the case when interpellants would not be satisfied with the reply or when the relevant executive authority would not reply to the interpellation within 3 weeks.More detailed was the legal regulation of interpellating of the third period. In accordancewith the provisions of two standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm, the marshal lodged the interpellation at the order of the day ex officio. Only then were further actions of the third period undertaken: explanatory statement of the interpellation by the interpellant (with the support of at least 7 deputies); replying or refusing to reply by the interpellated body; opening the discussion upon request with the support of at least 13 (later10) deputies. The final action of the third period was Sejm’s taking a stance on the reply to the interpellation, being expressed in the form of two alternative resolutions: the resolution on acknowledging the reply of the interpellated body or a resolution on not acknowledging the reply of the interpellated body. On the grounds of the standing orders of the II Silesian Sejm, lodging the interpellation at the order of the day by the marshal could take place exclusively on interpellants’ demand. Besides, the debate on the interpellation and the reply to it could take place on the basis of the resolution of the entire Sejm, and not with the support of 13 or 10 deputies. What is more, passing the resolutions that evaluated the interpelled body’s reply by Sejm was of a facultative character. Pursuant to art. 84 paragraph 4 of the standing orders of the IV Silesian Sejm, the marshal lodged the interpellation at the order of the day of plenary sitting in three cases: on interpellants’ demand; if the voivode notified the marshal that he intended to give an oral reply; when the period of 3 months had passed since the interpellation was submitted. Moreover, the debate (discussion) followed on the basis of the resolution issued by Sejm. An important restriction on the effectiveness of interpellating was provided by act 84 paragraph 6 of the latter standing orders, constituting that in the debate, apart from the representative of the Government, also one of interpellants and one of the deputies whose stance is different from the one expressed by the interpellants were allowed to take the floor. The comparison of the rules regulating the interpellation procedure in four standing ordersof the Silesian Sejm demonstrates that with the passing of time legal provisions restricted theeffectiveness of interpellating by means of the following: limiting the admissibility of the debate on the reply to the interpellation; the participation in the discussion of a deputy whose standpoint was different from the one of interpellants; excluding the possibility of expressing the opinion on the reply by Sejm, in the form of a resolution on acknowledging the reply of the interpellated or, alternatively, on not acknowledging the reply of the interpellated. Interpellation practice in Silesian Sejm 1922—1939The problem of conformity of practicing with legal regulation of interpellating Art. 44 of two standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm obliged the marshal to pose a question to the interpelled body about time when the interpelled body would submit their reply to the interpellation. The review of 90 interpellations of Silesian Sejm of I term of office demonstrates that not even once did the marshal pose such a question. The same article specified that the written form of the reply was permissible only if the interpellants agreed to it in advance. In practice, the interpellated body provided their reply almost exclusively in the written form, despite the fact that the interpellants agreed to the written form only in three cases. With the exception of three cases, whereby — clearly by mistake — the marshal accepted the interpellation despite the lack of one signature, in the remaining cases the minimal required support was adhered to. So was the case in the Silesian Sejm of I, II, and III terms of office. The standing orders of first three Sejms specified that a deadline for replying to the interpellation should not exceed 3 weeks. In the replies that were found, the addressee of the interpellation usually exceeded, sometimes considerably, the deadline specified in the standing orders. There were merely few replies submitted within the deadline. The contents of several interpellations were beyond the scope of the competences of the voivode and the Voivodeship Council. These were interpellations concerning special (non-consolidated) administration, i.e. judicial, military, or railroad administration, as well as interpellations that fell within the competences of the voivode of Cracow, or even the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Silesian voivodes replied to these interpellations as well, acting as intermediaries, sending the interpellations themselves to appropriate authorities and offering on their behalf adequate explanation to the interpellants.The first action of the third period of interpellating was lodging the interpellation by themarshal at the order of the day of the plenary sitting, and the final action was formulating anopinion — a positive or negative one — by Sejm about the reply submitted by the interpelledbody.Pursuant to the provisions of two standing orders of the I Silesian Sejm, the marshal lodged the interpellation at the order of the day ex officio. In practice, marshal Konstanty Wolny lodged at the order of the day of I Silesian Sejm merely 5 interpellations, two of which were lodged on interpellants’ request. In the final period of interpellating, 3 replies were acknowledged by Sejm, and 2 replies were not acknowledged. In III Silesian Sejm, the marshal lodged 4 interpellations at the order of the day. The voivode’s reply to one of them was acknowledged by Sejm, one reply was not acknowledged. In the case of the remaining two replies, the motions were not voted on. In practice — as a matter of fact against the law — the marshal of Silesian Sejm did not lodge interpellations at the order of the day when interpellants accepted the reply. In such situations, probably after consulting the interpellants, the marshal terminated the proceedings of the second period, endorsing on the interpellation and on the reply ad acta. Due to the lack of sources, the question concerning the relationship between the statute law and the law realized in interpellating practice of IV Silesian Sejm must be left unanswered.Interpellating activity of parliamentary clubs (deputies) of Silesian SejmIn four Silesian Sejms there have been 141 interpellations altogether. The authors of 136 interpellations were parliamentary clubs, of 2 — Sejm committees, and in IV Silesian Sejm — in the absence of parliamentary clubs — deputies signed on the interpellations. The frequency of interpellating exhibited high variability: in I Silesian Sejm — 90 interpellationsper 187 plenary sittings; in II Silesian Sejm — 15 interpellations per 10 sittings; in IIISilesian Sejm — 33 interpellations per 49 sittings; in IV Silesian Sejm — 3 interpellations per32 sittings. In the period of three Silesian Sejms the PPS club (Polish Socialist Party), referred to as KPS (Club Socialist Deputies) in III Silesian Sejm, submitted the most, i.e. 41, interpellations, which constituted 29,7% of all (138) interpellations that were submitted to the marshal in the period between October 10th, 1922 and March 26th, 1935. In the second place, with 26 interpellations (18,8%), was ChD (Christian Democracy). Such a result, gained almost exclusively until the May Coup, when Christian Democracy formed a part of ruling coalition, contradicts the thesis that interpellations, as a means of controlling administration,serve opposition more than factions in power. The interpellating practice proves the truthfulness of this thesis in the period ranging from the May Coup up to the last sitting of IIISilesian Sejm, when opposition factions submitted 50 interpellations, while the sanation clubNChZP (National Christian Labour’s Unity) — only 2 interpellations. Twenty-one interpellations (15,2%) were submitted by NPR (National Workers’ Party). Two workers’ parties (PPS and NPR) altogether lodged 62 interpellations, i.e. 44,9% of all interpellations(136) submitted by parliamentary clubs in Silesian Sejms of three terms of office. The Club of Deputies’ Group of Christian Democracy and National Workers’ Party, formed after the election failure of NPR in II (three deputies) and III (2 deputies) Silesian Sejm, submitted20 interpellations (2 in II and 18 in the III Silesian Sejm), which constituted 14,5% of allinterpellations, submitted in the Silesian Sejm during three terms of office. KN (German Club) interpellated individually 14 times (10,1%), joint interpellations were altogether 14 (10,1%), i.e. 8 interpellations in I and 6 interpellations in III Silesian Sejm. The authors of 3 interpellations of the IV Silesian Sejm were deputy Józef Płonka (NChZP— National Christian Work Union), deputy Paweł Kubik (ZZP — Polish Trade Association), andnon-partisan deputy form Zaolzie, Rudolf Paszek. Therefore, formed in the year 1928, the sanation club NChZP, with merely 3 interpellations (2 in II and 1 in the IV Silesian Sejm) occupied the last place, exhibiting a very insignificant activity as far as interpellating was concerned. The analysis of the content of interpellations submitted by parliamentary clubs(Sejm committees, deputies) in Silesian Sejm The content of interpellations allows to distinguish the following thematic groups: interpellations on social affairs, political issues, sociopolitical affairs, educational problems, public security matters, communication issues, construction issues, and police affairs. Moreover, there can be identified other matters, which encompass a wide range of issues that go beyond the uppermentioned categorization. Interpellations on social affairs were dominated by two parliamentary clubs of workers’ parties, i.e. KPPS (Club Polish Socialist Party), later KPS (Club Socialist Deputies), with 15 interpellations per 41 interpellations in total) and KNPR (Club of National Workers’ Party) with 11 interpellations (per 21 interpellations in total). Altogether, both clubs of workers’ parties interpellated 26 times per 62 interpellations submitted by them. KChD (Club of Christian Democracy) interpellated on social affairs 7 times (per total 26 interpellations that they submitted). Of 3 interpellations submitted to the marshal by sanation party KNChZP (Club of National Christian Labours limity), 3 interpellations concerned social issues (2 in II Silesian Sejm, 1 in IV Silesian Sejm). Into the class of interpellations on social affairs, one also has to include 3 interpellations submitted by KZPChDiNPR (The Club of Deputies’ Group of Christian Democracy and National Workers’ Party). Moreover, there were 3 interpellations submitted by KN and 3 joint interpellations. In total, in four Silesian Sejms there were 45 interpellations concerning social affairs (per 141 interpellations altogether), which constituted 31,9% of all interpellations.A significant percentage of such interpellations in relation to their total number faithfullyreflected social problems of Silesia: increasing unemployment, lockouts, workers’ dismissals,irregular payment of benefits, the lack of insurance against unemployment, mass job dismissalnotes, celebrating holidays (i.e. working not on all days of the week), suspending by fraternities the payment of pensions and other dues, etc. Interpellations concerning political affairs were 31. In this thematic group, in majority (13) were joint interpellations (interpartisan). Nine interpellations on political issues were tabled by KZPChDiNPR; 4 interpellations — by KPPS; 2 — by KChD; 1 interpellation was submitted by each of the following clubs: KNPR, KN, and also NChZP deputies. A small group, merely 8, of interpellations on sociopolitical affairs (5,7%) was constituted by 6 interpellations by KNPR, 1 interpellation by KChD, and 1 interpellation by KPPS. The contents of these interpellations demonstrates a close relationship between political affairs and social issues. The examples of such a relationship may be interpellations on implementing on the Silesian voivodeship — without the consent of Silesian Sejm- the spirits monopoly law, or interpellations on inadequate distribution of tobacco warehouses, in which incorrect application of law could deprive many people of their work. As far other thematic groups are concerned, there must be identified the following numbers of interpellations submitted by parliamentary clubs:— on schools affairs: 12 interpellations (5 by KChD; 1 by KNPR, 3 by KN, 3 by KZPChDil-NPR);— on public security issues: 3 interpellations (1 by KChD; 2 by KN);— on communication issues: 3 interpellations (2 by KChD; 1 by KN);— on construction affairs: 3 interpellations (1 by KChD; 1 by KPPS; 1 by KZPChDiNPR);— on police affairs: 3 interpellations by KPPS;— on other affairs: 32 interpellations (7 by KChD; 2 by KNPR; 3 by KN; 12 by KPPS; 4 byKZPChDiNPR; 3 joint; 1 by non-partisan deputy Rudolf Paszek).
More...
The following studies collected in this volume are devoted to the subject matter of the royal elections in the political and legal tradition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealthbetween the 16th and the 18th century. The volume has been divided into three parts,comprised of thirty-five essays total. The first part, titled “On the Idea, Symbols and Practiceof Choice,” approaches the royal elections from the perspective of the study of political doctrine.The article by Teresa Chynczewska-Hennel presents examples of Old Polish political life which reflect the standpoint that the royal elections benefitted the Commonwealth in selecting the best candidates to the throne of Poland. Andrzej Stroynowski, in turn, focuses on both the benefits and the drawbacks of royal elections. Mariusz Markiewicz offers insight into the ways in which Polish royal elections were perceived in 17th century-Europe. Finally, an article by Jolanta A. Daszyńska constitutes a conclusion of sorts, as it touches upon the topic of the first presidential election in the United States of America understood as a reflection of the practical realization of the republican ideals of that young nation’s society.The second part of the volume, dedicated specifically to the particular elections of the rulers of the Commonwealth, is divided into six parts and ordered chronologically according to the individual rulers referenced in the articles. As a result, this part of the volume constitutes a synthetic overview of the evolution of the idea of the royal election in Polish political tradition between the 16th and the 18th century. This part of the volume begins with articles on the development of early modern political theory and praxis related to the elections in the times of the last of the Jagiellonian dynasty. Maciej Serwański, Tomasz Kempa, Jerzy Urwanowicz, and Dorota Gregorowicz write about the political praxis during the first royal elections, while Agnieszka Pawłowska-Kubik as well as Dariusz Dolański and Filip Wolański devote their articles to the conceptions of the royal elections in their initial stages (with regard to Zebrzydowski’s Rebellion and 18th century historical compendia respectively). In the parts devoted to elections during the reign of Sigismund III Vasa’s two sons as well as the reign of John III Sobieski, the authors discuss the issues of the relationship with the political elites (Anna Filipczak-Kocur, Maciej Franz), as well as the military (Przemysław Gawron, Zbigniew Hundert). In turn, Paweł Duda, MonikaKonrádová, and Aleksandra Ziober touch upon the diplomatic relationships with the Vaticanand the Holy Roman Empire, while Artur Goszczyński and Robert Kołodziej focuson the organization of the election. Eight of the articles in this part of the volume discussthe crucial Saxon period in the history of Poland. Mariusz Sawicki and Andriej Macuk discuss the attitude of the Commonwealth elites to the election of the Saxon kings. The diplomatic issues connected with European politics are elaborated upon by Aleksandra Skrzypietz (the correspondence of the Prince of Conti), Zbigniew Anusik (Swedish politics), and Urszula Kosińska (Infante Manuel, Count of Ourém’s candidacy to the throne of Poland).Moreover, this part of the volume focuses also on the important issue of the candidacy andelection of Stanisław Leszczyński to the throne of Poland, which is touched upon in differentcontexts in articles by Michał Zwierzykowski, Tomasz Ciesielski, and Małgorzata Durbas.Moreover, two articles are devoted to the era of Stanisław August Poniatowski: Arkadiusz M.Stasiak writes about the election of the king in the context of the God-given power of the king, on the basis of the election of 1764, while Henryk Kocój discusses the issue of electinga Saxon ruler during the time of the Great Sejm, in the context of the account of the Saxonianrepresentative to Poland, August Franz Essen.The last part of the volume is devoted to the election of civil servants in the Commonwealth.Andrzej Rachuba and Maria Czeppe discuss the influence of clergy on the decisions made at regional councils. Witold Filipczak presents the issue of the election of landed magistrates in the times of the Permanent Council, while Katarzyna Bucholc-Srogosz touches upon the election of the speakers of the Permanent Council. Tadeusz Srogosz discusses the issues with electing representatives and civil servants by the royalist faction at the regional council in Żytomierz in 1790. This part of the volume concludes with an article by Dariusz Nawrot, “Between the Commonwealth Tradition and the Rules of Centralized Power. The Election of Civil Servants in Lithuania in 1812.” The volume ends with an extensive bibliography and index.
More...
The Great Union and the completion of the process of establishing the Romanian unitary national state represented a decisive moment in the modernization, occidentalization and development of Romanian law in the spirit of its traditions. In the 100 years since then, he has undergone great transformations in line with historical developments, presenting himself today as a complex legal system facing the challenges of European integration and the assertion of globalization.Thus, a multidimensional radiography of the state of Romanian law is required, by identifying the founding principles, the traits and the defining evolutions, the establishment of connections and interdependencies with European Union law, the influences of comparative law and the metamorphoses due to the impact of globalization.
More...
This study is about the first 99 articles of Mecelle-i Ahkam-ı Adliye, the civil law prepared in the last years of the Ottoman State. The subject matter relates to the general principles of law, known as the Islamic law.
More...
Inheritance relation and institution of inheritance are the main subjects of this book. Inheritance is a process regulating the transfer of property by the deceased among his/hers inheritors. The transfer of property, assets, as well as certain rights and obligations from the deceased to inheritors settles in probate proceedings. Since 1955, inheritance in Serbia can be two fold: legal and testamentary. The Serbian legislature does not recognize other inheritances, such as inheritance contract. Therefore, an inheritance is possible only when a person dies, or when a person is declared dead. Legal inheritance presumes the deceased is inherited by his/hers legal inheritors, divided into inheritance levels according to kinship relatedness and kinship lineage with the deceased. Furthermore, inheritors of the closer inheritance levels exclude from the inheritance inheritors of the further inheritance level, hence the principle of exclusion is applied. The first inheritance level includes the deceased biological and adopted offspring, as well as conjugal partners. Persons related by blood with the deceased, that is, related by birth, have an equal right to inheritance as persons related by civil kinship, that is, related by adoption with the deceased. Gender equality of all offspring is one of the main legal rules of inheritance established by the socialist legislature in Serbia. Legal inheritance also assumes the rule according to which all inheritors of the same level have an equal right to inheritance. An exception to this rule is a spouse, for he/she, within legal inheritance, is entitled to one half of the deceased assets. That is, this inheritance portion is larger than inheritance portions of the deceased’s offspring, or all other inheritors. Testamentary inheritance, in contrast to legal, grants a person to dispose his/her property at own discretion. At the same time, the Law on Inheritance regulates that a testament cannot be open or property divided until the death of the Testator. In this way, compliance is attained between rules about testamentary inheritance and general rules of inheritance, as defined in the Law of Inheritance. Despite this regulation, practice often witnesses deviations from certain legal normative. Disagreement of theory and practice is not a sole characteristic of inheritance but also of other spheres in civil law. The institution of inheritance and inheritance practice do differ, however, from other law spheres in explicit parallel application of legal and customary normative. This parallel practice is in application throughout Serbia for more than a century in spite that civil law and legislation do not consider customary normative as a source of law. Customary law, due to this refutation, so represents an illegitimate law system. This issue provokes a number of questions, primarily: within legal and testamentary inheritance, how it is possible to have a parallel application of legal (official) and customary normative while at the same time, the whole procedure is considered legal? The parallel application of customary and law normative is not problematic solely in this matter but also raises a concern of collision in between the two respective normative. The collision emerges as a result of essentially different, opposed principles of inheritance within the two law systems.
More...
The year 2018 marks the 100th anniversary of regaining independence of Poland after 123 years of Partitions. Both, the importance of this occurrence and its symbolic purport can not be overestimated. It was a time of exultation and rebirth of national pride. But also, for still forming authorities and the whole nation, it was a time of countless challenges. Difficulties which had to be managed by reformers appeared in every area of life. Although Republic of Poland had risen from three distinct states with diametrically different economic, polical and legal realities, merging those varied parts into one state was still possible by dint of national identity, common culture and history. Sovereignty of the state, retrieved in 1918, was only the beginning of a long and intricate road of reforms which Poles had to go through for the next 20 years. Their goal was not only to retrive internal consistency of the reborn Republic but also to come into being internationally as a sovereign state. Those activities were accompanied on the one hand by the lack of experience or even the necessary knowledge and on the other by a rough, brutal political struggle which sometimes affected the direction of reforms and the rush of their introduction. As a result of such behavior, changes were proceeding with a currently inconceivable pace. However, in just two decades, the Republic of Poland not only was reborn as a state but it also managed to significantly develop and upgrow. We are handing over to you the publication in which we wanted to show how many problems had to be faced by then representatives of the authorities which took action to create uniform organizational structures and a common legal system for the regained state.
More...
The Law Department of New Bulgarian University is organizing a National Scientific Conference dedicated to its 25th anniversary. In focus of the discussion is the development of Legal Science and Education in Law from "Artes Liberales" Education perspective. The forum continues the tradition to provide a platform for research and creativity for academic staff at the Department on an annual base.
More...
Within the legal development of Romania over the last three decades, an important role has been played by jurisprudence through its major contribution to the configuration of the new Romanian law. The great stages of this process - from the legislative transition, with the adoption of the new Constitution (1991), the implications of the Euro-Atlantic integration and the adoption and implementation of the new codes - included the contribution of the conclusions of the judicial practice, which brought clarifications and absolutely necessary specifications. Irrespective of its form of manifestation - constitutional, conventional, European Union or national - jurisprudence has become today a decisive factor in the restructuring of the legal phenomenon, moreover: it can be said that today jurisprudence is the one that not only accompanies but also determines, a significant measure of substantive transformations of legal consciousness, indicating the entry of Romanian law into a new age.
More...
Work of Albert Caleb, Dr. in Law, Docent at Geneva University, member of Societé de Législation Comparée (Paris). Published in 1909 in Geneva (GEORG & Co, éditeurs) and Paris (Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence)
More...
This study brings together three canonical Greek orators from different periods. Antiphon, chronologically the first in the canon, takes us to the latter part of the 5th century BC, to the Peloponnesian war, echoes of which are heard in his speeches, and which ultimately brought about his downfall and death. Dinarchus on the other hand, the last of the canon, made a name for himself at the end of the Classical period, and lived on to witness the upheavals of the early Hellenistic age. Lycurgus finally whose life and work to some extent chronologically overlaps with Dinarchus provides a glimpse into the traumatic memory of Chaeronea (338 BC) which marked the end of Athens’ imperial ambitions. In this book the reader will find a Polish translation of the extant speeches of the three orators along with a selection of the preserved fragments of their work. The speeches in question all belong to the forensic genre. Their translations are generously annotated and prefaced with an introduction dealing with the authors’ biographies, an outline of the historical moment in which they lived, and a handful of observations about their style and idiolect. In addition, each of the speeches is also provided with more specific remarks which concern the nature of the case at hand, its legal underpinning, and a prosopography of the parties involved in the dispute.
More...
The edition presents report on the Grand Tour of Johann Christoph and Johann Seyfried Princes of Eggenberg. The journey occurred between 1660 and 1663, the aim was to attend the University of Louvain (Löwen) and then to travel through France and Italy. The report is written in German, it includes a long description of Paris and Italian cities. The introductory essay is written in German, it tells the history of the Eggenberg family and their possessions in Southern Bohemia. It also explains the methods used to finance the Grand Tour. All the explanatory footnotes are also in German. There are also explanatory comments annexed to the report, in which the editors discuss the German language style, the identity of the author, the purpose of the report and the art monuments commented in the report. The e-book does not include pictures.
More...
This collection is dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the Paisiy Hilendarski University of Plovdiv. On this occasion, a scientific conference Legal Science – Traditions and Actualities was held in Fall 2011 at the Faculty of Law. Presented papers there are included in this collection. The significant number of participants and the proposed materials made possible to single out several panels covering all areas of legal science: civil (private) law, labour and social security law, public (constitutional and administrative and financial) law, international law, criminal law and procedure, history of law and Roman law.
More...
Collection of reports from the scientific conference in honor of the 110th anniversary of the birth of Academician Lyuben Vassilev, held by the Institute for State and Law at the Bulgarian Academy on September 16 and 17, 2021.
More...
The subject of the study is the officials of the city of Będzin from the earliest times (i.e. from the 14th century) to the present. The main part is a compilation of lists of persons holding official positions in the institutions of the municipal government. The work includes biographies of selected individuals holding municipal offices in the period from the Middle Ages to the outbreak of World War II. The selection is not discretionary, but determined by the surviving sources and the possibility of using them to outline the biography. The two opening chapters provide an overview of Będzin's history and the history of its political system and municipal government from the founding of the city to the present day.
More...