I found an article on the website of the guardian, which can be linked to unit 8.
The article is about a senior executive Tim Nicholson who claimed that he was unfairly fired by a property investment company.
He is the former head of sustainability at Newcastle-based Grainger.
The raison for his dismissal was that his views on the environment don’t match with the other managers.
Tim Nicholson, who is 41 years old, has his own beliefs.
For example, he lives in an eco-renovated home, he doesn’t travel by plane anymore and he composts his food waste.
According to him, he was fired because he disagreed with practices of the company.
An example is that Nicholson's attempts to obtain data to develop a carbon management strategy were blocked.
A new law on religious discrimination was changed so that beliefs aren’t the same to religious faith.
The law would help a large numbers of employees because this case reflects a fundamental clarification of the law.
My opinion is that people should be able to express such views without fear of retribution or discrimination.
I think that this case will clarify this new law for a lot of people who live their lives like Tim Nicholson.
It’s outrageous to dismiss people because of their beliefs that don’t match the company’s rules.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/sep/06/employment-tribunal-dismissal-climate-change
woensdag 28 oktober 2009
maandag 26 oktober 2009
Brenda Power: Have courage - change this law for the sake of our young men
A 20-year-old man is going to jail for eleven months because his girlfriend’s parents don’t like him.
The young man hasn’t been violent or committed any assault and has no previous convictions, but yet he made the mistake of falling for a girl whose parents didn’t like him. The court convicted him for having sex with an under-age girl.
At the time of the offence, he was 19 years old and was dating a 16-year-old girl who would become 17 years old within three months witch is the legal age of consent. Most parents will know that of the two, she was probably the more emotionally mature. He was also unaware of the legal age of consent. He truly believed it was 16 when in fact it is 17. Ignorance of the law is no defense, but he genuinely believed the was acting legally.
The parents of the young girl insisted to end their relationship, but she didn’t agree. In the 6th of August 2008, the two met each other in a quiet wooded area. They began kissing and it proceeded to having sex. The girl’s father had followed her and he took her to the Irish police department, known as the ‘garda station’ and he made a complaint.
The views of the girl’s parents should be irrelevant. Their feelings about the young man, their disapproval of the relationship, none of these should matter. The most recent figures suggest that at least forty girls under the age of fifteen give birth in Ireland every year. Why aren’t their boyfriends in jail?
You can’t have one law for irritated parents. There has to be an age of consent. It is essential to protect young people from pedophiles, but also to spare them the potential trauma of early sexual activity. It is to save them from themselves and their own immaturity.
Hard cases make bad law but this one is clear evidence of a need to look again at the age of consent because the girl is often a little below the age of 17. Raising the age of consent for boys would be a practical response given that girls mature earlier, but that would almost be certainly be unconstitutional.
So the only sensible option is to legislate to withhold prosecutions for under-age sex where the age gap is less than five years and there is no evidence of violence.
The judge decided to suspend the young man’s jail sentence when the case comes back to his court in January 2009. He is placed on the sex offenders’ register, he may not enter the United States, he may not practice any job that involves contact with children. In fact, he will be lucky to get any job at all..
I think that the judge is wrong. The boy and the girl made an entire agreement. The girl was only three months away of the age of consent. The boy was not violent and didn’t rape the girl. The parents of the girl are ridiculous. Just because they don’t like the boy, they have made the boy’s young life miserable. The chance exist that he may not find a job witch is necessarily to survive. This is just ridiculous and outrageous!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6888770.ece
zondag 25 oktober 2009
class accuses university
I found an article that you can generally link to unit 1 and unit 6 because it’s about people going to the court and searching for damages.
A class from Chicago claims that the university of Illinois rejected qualified students but accepted unqualified ones because of their relations with politicians and other very important people. They went to the federal court to accuse the university.
The class also claims that the university maintained a clout list namely the category I list of students who were admitted because of their connections with political people. Although they had lower exam scores and class ranks than other applicants. The class claims that “Category I people” were allowed to appeal rejections, which often resulted in revision of their application and finally, admission to the university. Most people weren’t even aware they could appeal.
The university said to the class that their admission criterion is based on a strong academic record, competitive test scores, leadership and communication skills, but it doesn’t includes political connections.
Now the class seeks for actual and punitive damages for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, fraud and denial of equal protection.
I agree with the class that they went to court to accuse the university. It is really not accurate of the university that they do such things. We always look up to universities but if they do such things they will get a bad name.
Source: http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/10/23/Class_Sues_University_of_Illinois_Over_Clout.htm
Types of courts in Belgium
I’d like to retake unit 1. In the lessons, we learnt about the English courts. As we know, Belgium has also a court system: I’ll discuss it shortly for you. At the lowest level, we have the Police court and the justice of the peace court. A justice of the peace court deals with local administrative applications in common law jurisdictions while the Police Court deals with minor offences, infractions and traffic offenses. This law court also deals with traffic accidents related to compensation claims.
On the next level, we find the labour courts, the first instance courts and the commercial courts. The labour courts are dealing with disputes between employers and employees and disputes regarding social security. Secondly, the first instance courts: the courts of first instance consist of three divisions: the Civil Court, the Correctional Court and the Juvenile Court. The last one on this level is the commercial court. The commercial court is a court which deals with commercial litigation that exceeds the competence of the Justice of the Peace Court.
Just before the courts of highest instance, we still have the appellate courts: these consist of the labour appellate courts, the courts of appeal and the courts of Assize. The labour appellate courts are the courts that judge appeals against decisions of the Labour Court. Next, we have the courts of appeal: The Court of Appeal judges appeals against decisions of the Courts of First Instance and the Commercial. Last but not least: serious criminal cases, political offences and crimes of international law (genocide and crimes against humanity) are dealt by the Courts of Assize, The court consists of three judges and 12 jurors. It is the only court in Belgium in which cases are heard by a jury. The courts are located in each of the ten provinces of Belgium and do not have a permanent structure but are constituted for each specific case.
At last, we have the court of highest instance. The Court of Cassation is the highest appeal level, dealing only with points of law, no new facts can be brought before this court. The court consists of three chambers in which each chamber has a french and a dutch division. Each division of a chamber is lead by a chairman and consist of 5 or 6 judges.
Theoretically, we’ve had the most important courts. To make it more clear, I’ll give you an example of a possible law suit in Belgium. The article is about the family Pfaff. Last year, Kelly Pfaff had an interview with ‘Dag Allemaal’. The week after their interview, it was said in the magazine that the bankruptcy of her story was the fault of her former friend and business partner. She couldn’t bare being accused and she’s prosecuting Dag allemaal for slander. According to a law specialist, this case could get judged by the Court of Appeal.
What’s my own opinion about this? I found it very hard to believe when I read this. According to the European rights of human kind, we have freedom of speech. Apparently, we don’t. Our freedom of speech is limited by the law. If someone doesn’t like what an other human’s saying, they can prosecute. In what kind of world are we living? Everyone should have the right to express their opinion. Another person shouldn’t have a problem with that. Although, I have to admit that I don’t like people talking behind my back. That’s just not fair to the person you’re talking about. On the other hand, I understand the woman’s point of view. If it’s not true what someone’s telling, you should stop the gossip.
As conclusion, I must say I don’t agree with this law case because the business partner was a friend of Kelly Pfaff. This woman should have known she would get some attention of the media. If she can’t cope with this kind of behaviour, she should have never started a business with Kelly Pfaff.
Sources:
http://www.tv-visie.be/nieuws/belgie/pfaffs-artikel-inzet-van-rechtszaak-tegen-hoofdredactrice-dag-allemaal_32919/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court
http://www.lexadin.nl/wlg/courts/nofr/eur/lxctbel.htm#Minor Courts Justices of the Peace
On the next level, we find the labour courts, the first instance courts and the commercial courts. The labour courts are dealing with disputes between employers and employees and disputes regarding social security. Secondly, the first instance courts: the courts of first instance consist of three divisions: the Civil Court, the Correctional Court and the Juvenile Court. The last one on this level is the commercial court. The commercial court is a court which deals with commercial litigation that exceeds the competence of the Justice of the Peace Court.
Just before the courts of highest instance, we still have the appellate courts: these consist of the labour appellate courts, the courts of appeal and the courts of Assize. The labour appellate courts are the courts that judge appeals against decisions of the Labour Court. Next, we have the courts of appeal: The Court of Appeal judges appeals against decisions of the Courts of First Instance and the Commercial. Last but not least: serious criminal cases, political offences and crimes of international law (genocide and crimes against humanity) are dealt by the Courts of Assize, The court consists of three judges and 12 jurors. It is the only court in Belgium in which cases are heard by a jury. The courts are located in each of the ten provinces of Belgium and do not have a permanent structure but are constituted for each specific case.
At last, we have the court of highest instance. The Court of Cassation is the highest appeal level, dealing only with points of law, no new facts can be brought before this court. The court consists of three chambers in which each chamber has a french and a dutch division. Each division of a chamber is lead by a chairman and consist of 5 or 6 judges.
Theoretically, we’ve had the most important courts. To make it more clear, I’ll give you an example of a possible law suit in Belgium. The article is about the family Pfaff. Last year, Kelly Pfaff had an interview with ‘Dag Allemaal’. The week after their interview, it was said in the magazine that the bankruptcy of her story was the fault of her former friend and business partner. She couldn’t bare being accused and she’s prosecuting Dag allemaal for slander. According to a law specialist, this case could get judged by the Court of Appeal.
What’s my own opinion about this? I found it very hard to believe when I read this. According to the European rights of human kind, we have freedom of speech. Apparently, we don’t. Our freedom of speech is limited by the law. If someone doesn’t like what an other human’s saying, they can prosecute. In what kind of world are we living? Everyone should have the right to express their opinion. Another person shouldn’t have a problem with that. Although, I have to admit that I don’t like people talking behind my back. That’s just not fair to the person you’re talking about. On the other hand, I understand the woman’s point of view. If it’s not true what someone’s telling, you should stop the gossip.
As conclusion, I must say I don’t agree with this law case because the business partner was a friend of Kelly Pfaff. This woman should have known she would get some attention of the media. If she can’t cope with this kind of behaviour, she should have never started a business with Kelly Pfaff.
Sources:
http://www.tv-visie.be/nieuws/belgie/pfaffs-artikel-inzet-van-rechtszaak-tegen-hoofdredactrice-dag-allemaal_32919/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court
http://www.lexadin.nl/wlg/courts/nofr/eur/lxctbel.htm#Minor Courts Justices of the Peace
New court to help mothers at risk of losing their children
This blog is about an article I read on the internet and I think you can link this to unit 1 ; 'types of court'.
The article is about a woman, Sharon Simms who started abusing drugs at the age of 12 when she lived in a children's home. At the age of 30, she was addicted to crack, cocaine and alcohol. She saw three of her children taken away by social workers, the youngest just days after she was born.
Sharon Simms is not a rare example. There are a lot of mothers who lose child after child because of addiction problems. One mother lost already 14 babies. Each time she gave birth , her baby was whisked away.
For Simms, it was too hard to deal with the situation. She wanted to change her life because of her removed baby. She went on a residential treatment course, came off drugs and got her children back. She now works with other women who are trying to beat the addiction of alcohol and drugs and she will soon become a 'mentor mum' in the first drug and alcohol court in the UK!
The court is formally launched today and will start working in January. It is based on a model which has been successful in the US in helping parents fight the addictions.
Most of the funding of this £1.34 m initiative, comes from central government where two out of three care cases are linked to parent's substance misuse. In the court, each judge will follow his own cases through. Parents will be offered intervention by experts from the children's charity.
The idea of the court came from an encouter between Crichton and California judge, Len Adwards, at a conference in Australia in 2002.
Simms, now 36, credits the Maya treatment centre, where she now works, with helping her turn her life around. It offered her a six-month programme where she was allowed to have her baby back with her and to see her two other children. She started a new life.
The article is about a woman, Sharon Simms who started abusing drugs at the age of 12 when she lived in a children's home. At the age of 30, she was addicted to crack, cocaine and alcohol. She saw three of her children taken away by social workers, the youngest just days after she was born.
Sharon Simms is not a rare example. There are a lot of mothers who lose child after child because of addiction problems. One mother lost already 14 babies. Each time she gave birth , her baby was whisked away.
For Simms, it was too hard to deal with the situation. She wanted to change her life because of her removed baby. She went on a residential treatment course, came off drugs and got her children back. She now works with other women who are trying to beat the addiction of alcohol and drugs and she will soon become a 'mentor mum' in the first drug and alcohol court in the UK!
The court is formally launched today and will start working in January. It is based on a model which has been successful in the US in helping parents fight the addictions.
Most of the funding of this £1.34 m initiative, comes from central government where two out of three care cases are linked to parent's substance misuse. In the court, each judge will follow his own cases through. Parents will be offered intervention by experts from the children's charity.
The idea of the court came from an encouter between Crichton and California judge, Len Adwards, at a conference in Australia in 2002.
Simms, now 36, credits the Maya treatment centre, where she now works, with helping her turn her life around. It offered her a six-month programme where she was allowed to have her baby back with her and to see her two other children. She started a new life.
dinsdag 20 oktober 2009
Gary McKinnon to continue fight against extradition despite High Court ruling
I have found an article that you can link to unit 1: “Types of courts”.
The article is about a 43-year-old man, his name is Gary McKinnon. He has Asperger’s syndrome.
On 9 October 2009, he was denied permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The charges against Gary McKinnon were breaking into the network of the Pentagon’s military.
He hacked into the network to look for reports on UFOs.
Now, he is fighting against the decision of the High Court.
The decision is about the extradition of Gary McKinnon.
The High Court decided that the case couldn’t be moved to a higher level because it didn’t raise "points of law of general public importance".
The lawyers of McKinnon are now considering of applying to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Because of his syndrome, they say that it can be dangerous to extradition McKinnon; it could even lead to suicide.
My opinion of this article is that I agree with the mother of Gary McKinnon, it’s a lack of humanity.
When you know that the extradition isn’t good for the health of the victim, you should consider dropping the extradition.
The mother said that the UK would readily offer the citizens to protect a political relationship.
She thinks it a disgrace because it’s really inhuman. I also agree with this opinion because the UK has to help its citizens instead of looking at the political relationship with other countries.
Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/10/10/we-ll-send-him-hack-115875-21736252/
The article is about a 43-year-old man, his name is Gary McKinnon. He has Asperger’s syndrome.
On 9 October 2009, he was denied permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The charges against Gary McKinnon were breaking into the network of the Pentagon’s military.
He hacked into the network to look for reports on UFOs.
Now, he is fighting against the decision of the High Court.
The decision is about the extradition of Gary McKinnon.
The High Court decided that the case couldn’t be moved to a higher level because it didn’t raise "points of law of general public importance".
The lawyers of McKinnon are now considering of applying to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Because of his syndrome, they say that it can be dangerous to extradition McKinnon; it could even lead to suicide.
My opinion of this article is that I agree with the mother of Gary McKinnon, it’s a lack of humanity.
When you know that the extradition isn’t good for the health of the victim, you should consider dropping the extradition.
The mother said that the UK would readily offer the citizens to protect a political relationship.
She thinks it a disgrace because it’s really inhuman. I also agree with this opinion because the UK has to help its citizens instead of looking at the political relationship with other countries.
Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/10/10/we-ll-send-him-hack-115875-21736252/
zondag 18 oktober 2009
Guess jeans
Guess Jeans has to pay $370 m damages to five ex-employees. Georges Marciano(62), co-founder of Guess wroungly accuses them of trying to hide money, sortes of wines and art. Georges was the founding designer of Guess Jeans, the company that introduced stonewashed jeans to the US, in 1982.
It will be one of the largest awards in US courts this year. Those five ex-employees will each get $69m in compensatory damages and $5m in punitive damages. This was the verdict of the Los Angeles County superior verdict.
In class we learned about those damages, this is also the reason why I could link this article to my blog.
I searched for the correct definition of compensatory damages and punitive damages in a dictionary. It says: punitive damages are damages intended to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit and compensatory damages, also called actual damages, are paid to compensate the claimant for loss, injury, or harm suffered by another's breach of duty.
In August 2007, Marciano sued the five ex-employees because he accused them of stealing a lot of personal information, stealing letters, conspiring to sell wine from his collection and commit one of the largest art thefts in US history, including some works from Roy Lichtenstein. Marciano claimed that the stolen things were worth $ 413 m.
The lawsuit was thrown out in December 2008, but when those ex-employees knew what Marciano was doing, they filed a kind of a cross-complaint against the co-founder of Guess.
The ex-employees found their reputation was ruined after Marciano started to sent complaints to agencies and other parties accusing them of theft and fraud.
During the procedure, Marciona was a real obstacle. He did not defend himself at the trial, he also repeatedly did't show up at despositions and he also sued the judge in federal court, alleging constitutional violations!
After the verdict, one of the employees told the Los Angeles Times that he felt vindicated.
source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/29/georges-marciano-guess-cour-defamation
dictionary
It will be one of the largest awards in US courts this year. Those five ex-employees will each get $69m in compensatory damages and $5m in punitive damages. This was the verdict of the Los Angeles County superior verdict.
In class we learned about those damages, this is also the reason why I could link this article to my blog.
I searched for the correct definition of compensatory damages and punitive damages in a dictionary. It says: punitive damages are damages intended to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit and compensatory damages, also called actual damages, are paid to compensate the claimant for loss, injury, or harm suffered by another's breach of duty.
In August 2007, Marciano sued the five ex-employees because he accused them of stealing a lot of personal information, stealing letters, conspiring to sell wine from his collection and commit one of the largest art thefts in US history, including some works from Roy Lichtenstein. Marciano claimed that the stolen things were worth $ 413 m.
The lawsuit was thrown out in December 2008, but when those ex-employees knew what Marciano was doing, they filed a kind of a cross-complaint against the co-founder of Guess.
The ex-employees found their reputation was ruined after Marciano started to sent complaints to agencies and other parties accusing them of theft and fraud.
During the procedure, Marciona was a real obstacle. He did not defend himself at the trial, he also repeatedly did't show up at despositions and he also sued the judge in federal court, alleging constitutional violations!
After the verdict, one of the employees told the Los Angeles Times that he felt vindicated.
source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/29/georges-marciano-guess-cour-defamation
dictionary
What's the damage?
The rights of privacy vs. the rights to freedom of expression.
‘The Max Mosley’ case could become a standard for celebrities to fight more strongly in defense of their private lives against the press to decrease the press freedom. The emerging law of privacy is the weapon when celebs or business personalities battle it out at the high court to prevent (or punish) the publication of some media stories.
If Mosley wins, the judge could set a significant standard by making a massive award of exemplary or punitive damages against the publishers of the News of the World. It could be an amount of hundreds of thousands or even millions of pounds. In the Mosley case, it is about a story that the News of the World wanted to publish, but didn’t warn Mosley himself. If the court decide to punish such behavior, the press would have a hard time to publish such stories in the future.
The general damages (the normal measure of damages) are used to protect the feelings of the claimant caused by publishing private information. Naomi Campbell received £2,500 general damages after the Sunday Mirror published that she was considering to go to Narcotics Anonymous and she received an additional £1,000 because she suffered (additional distress). Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones received £3,750 each because Hello! Magazine published photos of their wedding. Loreena McKennit, a Canadian folk singer, received £5,000 damages (by the same judge who is now the judge in the Mosley case) for infringement of privacy after the publication of an unauthorized biography.
It is open to the judge to decide if the behavior of the News of the World is unacceptable and whether they didn’t warn Mosley was on purpose. If the court would say that the media are forced to tell individuals about their publications, it would be an intrusion into press freedom. Freedom of speech will continue to play a big part in the emerging law of privacy.
I think that the judge can do what she or he wants, but she or he can’t go to far. The law of privacy is often abused in cases such like this. It is easy to say that you are injured because of the publication of the story if you know you can receive a massive award for it. Look at Naomi Campbell, just because she said she suffered from additional distress, she received £1,000 more.. You can argue about that. I don’t say that the media can do everything. There are limits, but they also have freedom. They always have to be careful when they publish a story. If the person where the story is about, is not aware of the intention of publishing a story about him, the chance exist that the newspaper have to appear to court and have to pay a lot of money.
Daphné V.E.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)