Though a considerable number of law enforcement officers have a rudimentary training into recognizing the sources of stress accompanying situations like shootouts and violent crimes, still a majority of them do fail to grasp the size and scope of the physiological and psychological effects of stress on their body and mind (Ford, 1998). Police officers often come across gory and disturbing scenes accompanying violent crime investigations and shootings. Over the years, the cumulative impact of such incidents gives way to physical and emotional disturbances, which can fructify into undesirable results and consequences. Now is the time when the authorities and the people need to change their perceptions about law enforcement officers. They are not mere heartless and dry automatons, impervious to emotional trauma and stress, but live and pulsating humans whose very nature of work requires them to face violent incidents and situations. Yes, law enforcement officers do feel stress and there is no dearth of data revealing the unwanted impact of that stress on their personal and professional lives (Ford, 1998).Between the year 1976 and 1999, nearly 1,800 police officers and law enforcement personnel lost their lives in the line of duty (Lindsey Kelly, 2004). This comes down to an average of 78 officers per year. In fact, the state and the authorities are utterly sensitive to this issue and are doing their best in terms of upgrading the police infrastructure and equipment, modernizing training procedures and assuring ample budgetary allocations to save the lives of police officers. Sadly, the authorities are not as cognizant of and responsive to the silent killer called stress that has a more drastic impact on the mindset of law enforcement officers. All because of occupational stress, more than 400 police officers committed suicide in the year 2000 alone (Lindsey and Kelly, 2004). What more, the rate of suicide amongst the law enforcement officers in the US stands to be thrice that of the national average (Lindsey Kelly, 2004). The deathly toll that stress takes on the protectors and defenders of the civic life urgently needs to be arrested and dealt with.
The tendency to default when you are underwater even if you have the ability to pay the mortgage is known as strategic default. In this paper, I would first outline the legal and ethical constraints associated with such defaults and then discuss its implications on the lender, the borrower, and the society as a whole.In recent years many states in the U.S. have witnessed a dramatic fall in home prices. This has encouraged homeowners in these states to simply walk away from their mortgages not out of an inability to pay the mortgages, but because strategic default seems the best available option financially. In order to understand the reasons behind walking away better consider the example of a man who bought a house on credit for $300,000 in a year when the home prices were expected to rise. Suppose now that two years later the homeowner still owes $250,000 but the home prices have taken a serious downward plunge resulting in him owing more than what his house is worth of. Given such an eventuality, it makes much sense, economically, for the homeowner to completely stop making mortgage payments and invest the money saved elsewhere. In fact, defaulting on the mortgage payments seems to be the only option for the homeowners if he were to make his decision to default on a purelyly financial basis.Yet, it can be seen that in actuality, a great number of underwater homeowners carry on paying off their mortgage debts. This non-exercising of strategic default option may be as a result of two reasons: (1) state regulations that allow banks and lenders to pursue legal claims on borrower’s other assets, and (2) shame and fear associated with joining an exclusive club of defaulters that may have made the homeowners reluctant to default.It is important to note that the activity of strategic default is perfectly legal in U.S. There is no law as such that disallows it or deems it punishable. States like Florida and Nevada, however, allow lenders and banks to pursue legal claims against the defaulters either themselves or through some collection agency or firm, making it costly for the homeowners to default.
However, it can be agreed that attaining this desirable status, in which all stakeholders benefit optimally, is relatively challenging. Coupled with increased pressure from the market to make profits, most business persons have opted for satisfying their needs at the expense of the consumer. Furthermore, individual business entities have gone to great lengths to attain and maintain a competitive edge in the markets that they explore. In essence, they take measures that are geared towards enhancing their performance and outperforming their counterparts. They have adopted malpractices such as collusive price fixing, predatory pricing, tie-up sale, discriminatory pricing and creating barriers to market entry amongst others. These trends have had adverse effects on both the consumers and other business persons in the market. To address these, regulatory policies have been put in place. Perhaps one that has been more effective in addressing the preceding concern is competition policy. Competition policy constitutes a set of measures adopted by the government which direct the behavior of the businesses as well as the structure of the entire business industry. Their main aim is to maximize the welfare of the affected stakeholders and promote effective and efficient performance. They provide useful insights regarding how business entities and individuals can explore the market and enhance healthy competition. Further, they offer guidelines regarding how to prevent anti competitive practices that hurt the industry and undermine sustainable growth and development. At this point, it cannot be disputed that unfair competitive practices promote aggression that has detrimental effects on the performance of businesses. In… As globalization trends continue to grow complex and intricate, firms are increasingly being compelled to adopt approaches and practices that can enable them to attain and maintain a competitive edge in the market. This has prompted them to in some instances adopt practices that have harmful effects on their competitors as well to the consumer base. Monopolistic firms have particularly been affected the most because of their influence in the market. Coupled with their ability to make critical decisions regarding the products and services that they provide, the inherent power has made them to make decisions that have negative effects on their respective industries. Legal provisions have been established on a national, regional and international scale to guide their behavior in this regard. This ensures that the decisions that they make do not affect the functioning of the market and the general wellbeing of the market. Competition law has particularly been imperative in ensuring that this behavior or that their practices are economically viable. One of the tendencies that have been noted in the market pertains to violation of the competition law through margin squeeze.
Comparison between ICSID, UNCITRAL and ICC"Put another way, the main question is whether or not the umbrella clause renders a breach of an investment contract a treaty claim.3 A review of previous arbitration decisions on the issue have produced mixed results. It would appear that with contradictory rulings on the matter, umbrella clauses can sometimes be effective for resolving disputes arising out of investment contracts concluded under the authority of BITs. Wong argues however that, contradictory rulings only serve to nullify umbrella contracts and thus render them ineffective as a means of resolving disputes arising out of an investment contract.4 This paper evaluates umbrella clauses with a view to determining whether or not a rule of law can be identified in the jurisprudence pointing to the when and how umbrella clauses can be used effectively to resolve disputes arising out of an investment contract. Case Law Consistency in arbitration decisions is an allusive concept due to the fact that arbitration panels are formed specifically for a case. As a result, panels do not sit consistently and therefore they do not have the persistent experience and consistency that court appointed judges may have and usually accumulate. Moreover, international arbitration does not have a hierarchal structure in which appeals can be heard by a higher arbitration panel for the purpose of establishing or clarifying a rule of law. In the meantime, arbitration decisions are usually heard in private, and where they are published and shared, publication is delayed and highly selective. For example, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) only publishes 12% of its cases and even then, the case is only reported three years after the award is given (Guillaume, 2011).5 Therefore in evaluating case law in international commercial arbitration, it is difficult to know with any degree of reasonable certainty, what the actual jurisprudence is on a particular legal matter. The cases that are available reveal only limited jurisprudence and any evaluation is therefore qualified by the fact, that a complete analysis of the legal rule is not possible. This analysis of the effectiveness of the umbrella clause for the resolution of disputes arising under an investment contract can only be determined on the basis of the available published arbitration cases. The first case of note is the 2003 case of SGS Societe Generale de Surveillance S.A. v Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This case involved a dispute which arose under a contract between Pakistan and Swiss company for the latter’s services as a shipment inspection agency. Pakistan terminated the contract later on and the Swiss company, relying on the BIT between Switzerland and Pakistan submitted the matter to arbitration and claimed that in addition to breaching the terms of the contract, Pakistan also violated its obligations under the BIT and especially the umbrella clause. Pakistan argued however that the dispute arose under an investment contract and therefore the panel did not have jurisdiction over the matter.6 The arbitral panel ruled that the investment contract between Pakistan and the Swiss company predated the BIT and the applicability of the umbrella clause must be viewed in that light. In this regard, unless there was clear
The most important aspect here is the implied consent of cooperating states that, in specifically outlined areas, actions by the commission are tantamount as an act of each of the member states. This paper will examine this principle with the purpose of identifying the extent to which commissions can claim as agents of its member states. This examination will focus on the experience of the European Commission. An understanding of this aspect can provide a roadmap and the dynamics to the responsibilities of the commission as well as the jurisdictional authority, a complicated variable that often creates conflict.Commissions have different definitions. This is due to the fact that they assume different characteristics as defined by the rules or the laws that govern its establishment. The constitution or by-laws of a commission would often provide an article that defines its nature, mandate, responsibilities, and authority. However, a general conception that typifies these organizations is that they are bodies that serve as common agencies of parties that collectively cooperate for specific purposes. For example, the commission organized to resolve the interstate water conflict in the United States is a corporate and political body that serves as an agency for the representatives of the concerned states, serving as commissioners (Sherk, 2000, pp.706). The decisions made and contracts and transactions entered into by the commission are binding for all the states involved. There is also the case of the International Law Commission, which is tasked – by the strength of the commitment given by the member countries – to resolve interstate conflicts according to international laws and conventions. It is a legal animal so to speak, a judicial institution by which members accede. The European Commission is considered a regulatory body, which pervades the ethos of the institution that focuses on quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial as well as the executive component within the Commission’s competences (Cini, 2007, p. 32).
However, the courts have treated such evaluations as mere exaggeration. Whilst pronouncing such judgements the courts have stressed that they have given due consideration to Parliament’s sovereign intentions2.In the Von Colson case, the EU made it mandatory for the national law to implement a specific EU Directive3. However, in Marleasing the EU required the national courts to interpret national legislation in accordance with the provisions of the pertinent EU Directives4. However, the UK Courts though agreeable to implementing the principle established in Von Colson, were unwilling to accede to the obligation established in the Marleasing judgement.In Duke v. GEC Reliance Ltd, the plaintiff Mrs. Duke’s employment had been terminated as she had attained the age of sixty years. However, men were allowed to work till the age of sixty – five5. The national courts did not revoke her termination orders, because she had applied to the court prior to the passing of the 1986 Sex Discrimination Act. The ECJ held that this decision breached the Equal Treatment Directive of 1976. This case clearly illustrates the reluctance of the UK courts to interpret national laws in accordance with EU Directives6.Subsequent, to the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998, the ECHR or European Court of Human Rights’ Influence on UK legislation was negligible. There was a marked lack of enthusiasm in the UK to conform to the prevalent international standards in this context. The ECJ had reiterated on several occasions that the judiciary of the UK had to incorporate into their law the precepts of the EU law as also the principles that evolved from the ECHR. Nevertheless, the national courts chose to avoid doing so7.Tony Blair integrated the European Convention into the national law of the UK. Afterwards, the Human Rights Act was ratified in 1998, this served to make the UK legislation akin to the laws of the US and themember states of the EU.
Terms Act 1977 prevents the parties from imposing unconscionable and unfair obligations and liabilities against each other while the Sales of Goods Act 1979 provides protection to the buyer and the seller alike.Since there are limitations when it comes to the clauses of the contract, the parties must be vigilant in protecting their rights. In our hypothetical case, the parties to the contract, Bright Wheel Bicycles Limited (“BWB”), a UK manufacturer of bicycles and Top Gear Trading Ltd (“TGT”), a retailer based in Manchester, entered into a contract of sale of a good whereby BWB is the supplier and TGT the reseller. Some of the bikes supplied by BWB to TGT were returned by the clients of TGT because they were defective. However, TGT complained about the defective bikes, BWB pointed out that their contract absolved BWB of liabilities under certain circumstances. The question now is whether or not clause 4 in the contract between BWB and TGT is legally binding upon the parties. Clause 4 contains several provisions including the warrantee for defects good for one (1) year, the obligation of the supplier to repair, replace or reduce the price of the item sold whenever appropriate and an exclusionary clause which limits the liabilities of the supplier to what has been stipulated in the contract to the exclusion of “all warranties, conditions and other terms implied by statute or common law are, to the fullest extent permitted by law.”According to Section 3 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) 1977, a party that drafted the standard form cannot exclude certain liabilities from breach of such contract or absolve the party from liabilities when the performance of its obligations is substantially or totally different from that what is required or expected of him or her. Moreover, the UCTA so provides that the manufacturer’s guarantee with regards to loss arising from defective goods or negligence of the distributor where the goods involved in the contract are the types that are ordinarilysupplied for private use or consumption.
Hong Kong operated a ‘sterling exchange system from 1935 – 1973, excluding the years of Japanese occupation. The sterling exchange system is a currency board with note issue back by holdings of Sterling assets’ (Crosby 2000). Then, ‘between 1972 and 1974, the HK dollar was set at a fixed rate to the US dollar. From November of 1974 until the return of the currency board in 1983, the HK dollar floated freely against the US dollar’ (Hanson). Hong Kong being a Special Administrative Region of China is dependent on mainland demand but its monetary system is still attached to the U.S. If ever China retaliates against pressure for the trade protectionism in the United States, then Hong Kong would be caught in between. ‘Where it comes to the real economy, Hong Kong’s fortunes are increasingly linked to the mainland. its manufacturing base is located across the border, in 2009 mainland tourists accounted for more than half of the total, mainland purchasers accounted for about 1/5th of real estate demand, and mainland firms accounted for more than half of total issues and market capitalization in the Hang Zeng’ (China Analytics 2010).Outside of Tokyo, Hong Kong attracts investors, businessmen, and economists because of its rule of law, its low tax regime and highly urbanized infrastructure. Hong Kong also played a significant part in China’s success economically speaking, posing as a middleman for the mainland’s investments and trade. ‘In September 1982, while Hong Kong was under a free-floating system, officials began to plan for the regions’ future after its return to China. As a result, confidence in the HK dollar and economy began to diminish’ (Hanson). Also that year, the business scenario was not good – the stock market down by 50 per cent, the property market experiencing a downturn and there were runs on the small banks. ‘The value of the HK dollar continued to decrease throughout the year and on September 24, 1983, reached an all-time low of HK$9.55 per US dollar’ (Hanson).
This paper posits that a ban on throwing recyclables into trash cans in Portland Oregon is necessary and positive because there is a growing clamor for it as reflected in a cascade of legislation in many states all over the US enforcing such related bans because there is overwhelming evidence that mandated bans in law are more effective than voluntary recycling programs in reducing waste and eliciting support for recycling programs, and because the foundations of good environmental practices and awareness in the communities of Portland are in place to successfully enforce a ban (Millman. CalRecycle. Bosque. Koch. City of Seattle. Peters).First, there are overwhelming precedents from other states with regard to positive outcomes and wide support for the enactment and enforcement of laws that ban the trashing of recyclables such as electronics and other items from trash cans. Those precedents point to the success of such legislation and controls in bringing about a drastic reduction in the number of such recyclables in the trash, with positive repercussions on the sustainability of the trash collection programs, the recycling programs, and the landfills that are used to hold the trash. In-state after state, the enactment of laws relating to e-wastes, for instance, and the banning of such e-wastes from landfills have forced citizens to more actively support their state recycling programs, and to be very mindful about what they put in the trash. In North Carolina, for instance, state laws that ban recyclable items from its landfills have resulted in the passage of stricter regulations and area ordinances relating to the putting of such items into the trash bins, reinforcing the state landfill bans in a downward cascade of restrictions. What the state laws on bans on landfills of recyclables do, as demonstrated in the example of North Carolina, is to tighten regulations and laws down the line, passing on from the state to thecities and counties, leading to the eventual policing of the trash cans coming out of individual homes, with good results.
It is expected to increase to $4.4 trillion in 2008. Based on all projections, however, there is an expectation of high enrollment and growth in Medicaid and Medicare spending over that time. (Sisko, Truffer, Smith, 2009). Physician Medicare payments will remain constant between 2010 and 2018. Under the current law, there is an expected acceleration of national healthcare spending starting in 2011 will increase by 7.2% by 2018.By payer Medicare spending is projected to increase by 8.1%, Medicaid by 6.9% and private health insurance by 5.8%. Out of pocket expenses are projected to grow by 3.8% and prescription drugs are expected to increase by 3.5%. Hospital spending is expected to increase by 7.2% and physician services by 6.2%.As we all become greatly concerned over numbers like these, Stuart Altman (2003), tells us that in his opinion, higher spending growth rates are not necessarily destructive. The laws that higher costs are usually offset by lower wages for workers who enroll in employer-sponsored health plans. He does admit that higher costs in public programs are somewhat different because increased spending means increased taxes which then distorts the economy. Higher costs also increase the ranks of the uninsured (Altman, Tompkins, Ellat, 2003). Henry Aaron (2003) agrees with him that he feels that the GDP could be 20% without causing reduced expansion in other parts of the economy.There are, of course, many good reasons for healthcare spending. Some of those are technology but most of them are the overall health and happiness of the people of the United States. Keeping people healthy is important in the sense that they are more productive and happier when they are healthy. There are many issues that need to be death with at this time including obesity, smoking, teen pregnancies and many others.