14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 201 (2008) Neomi Rao. Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law. Human dignity has developed into a core value of modern constitutionalism. In the United States, the Supreme Court has referred to human dignity only sporadically, but several justices and a number of scholars have advocated using the concept of human dignity to modernize American constitutional law and to keep in step with the international community. I argue in this Article that acceptance of the modern, largely European conception of human dignity would weaken American constitutional protections for individual rights. Human dignity […]
Volume 14, Issue 2
5 posts
14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 257 (2008) Mathilde Cohen. Ph.D. candidate, Paris-X University and J.S.D. candidate, Columbia Law School. B.A., M.A., Philosophy, Sorbonne (Paris I). LL.B., Sorbonne (Paris I). LL.M., Columbia Law School. This Article examines the thesis according to which the practice of giving reasons for decisions is a central element of liberal democracies. In this view, public institutions’ practice—and sometimes duty—of reason-giving is required so that each individual may view the state as reasonable and therefore, according to deliberative democratic theory, legitimate. Does the giving of reasons in actual court practice achieve these goals? Drawing on empirical research […]
14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 277 (2008) Krešimir Piršl. S.J.D. (Duke University School of Law), LL.M. (Duke University School of Law), LL.M. (University of Zagreb School of Law), J.D. (University of Rijeka School of Law). This manuscript resulted from research undertaken at Duke University School of Law (Visiting Scholar, 2006-2007) and Georgetown University Law Center (Visiting Researcher, 2004-2006). The article examines trends in, and developments of, selected issues and legal concepts that have developed in United States corporate law and European Community company law. The aim is to reveal the general direction of corporate or company law by surveying the […]
14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 359 (2008) Florian Sander. Associate, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Hamburg, Germany; LL.M., Harvard Law School, 2005; Dr. Jur. (Ph.D.), University of Hamburg, 2003. As expected, on October 23rd, 2007, the ECJ ruled that the so-called VW-Gesetz (“Volkswagen Law”) – a statute designing Volkswagen AG’s corporate laws in a manner that deviates from the general German corporate laws – constitutes an infringement of the freedom of capital movements (Art. 56 EC). Following General Advocate Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer’s February 2007 opinion stipulating that the ECJ should reject the VW-Gesetz,# the ECJ has articulated what most observers considered the most […]
14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 371 (2008) Gilles Cuniberti. Associate Professor of Law, Paris Val-de-Marne University, France; J.D., Ph.D (Law), Panthéon-Sorbonne University; LL.M., Yale. On October 15 and 16, 1999, the European Council met in Tampere, Finland, and approved the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions and judgments. In its conclusions,# the European Council insisted that the principle should become the “cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the Union.” In civil matters, which will be the exclusive focus of this note, the European Council specifically made clear that the “intermediate measures which are still […]