Saturday, February 27, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
- What is to be understood by 'rational legal argument'? To what extent can legal reasoning be rational? Is the demand for rationality in legal affairs justified? And what are the criteria of rationality in legal reasoning? The answer to these questions is not only of interest to legal theorists and philosophers of law. They are pressing issues for practicing lawyers, and a matter of concern for every citizen active in the public arena. Not only the standing of academic law as a scientific discipline, but also the legitimacy of judicial decisions depends on the possibility of rational legal argumentation.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
- References to the "lessons of history" are ubiquitous in law. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in recent debates over U.S. counterterrorism policy. In response to the Bush Administration's reliance on World War II-era decisions - Johnson v. Eisentrager, Ex Parte Quirin, Hirota v. MacArthur, and In re Yamashita - opponents have argued that these decisions have been rejected by the "lessons of history." They argue that the history of wartime cases is one marked by executive aggrandizement, panic-driven attacks on civil liberties, and overly quiescent courts - none of which should be repeated.
Click for article
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Predictions that the number of redundancies in the UK would rise sharply during the credit crunch have been substantiated by the figures from the Office for National Statistics. The impact of the economic slowdown has also been demonstrated by fewer job vacancies and a rise in the number of redundancies particularly in the finance, business services and construction industries.
Redundancy is one of the most traumatic events an employee may experience. Announcement of redundancies will invariably have an adverse impact on morale, motivation and productivity. The negative effects can be reduced by sensitive handling of redundant employees and those remaining.