MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W188080818

Judicial Globalization: New Development or Old Wine in New Bottles?

2003· article· en· W188080818 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carl Baudenbacher

Notice bibliographique

RevueAlexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGlobalizationLawHuman rightsPolitical scienceConversationCriminal lawDemocracySociologyPolitics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

I. INTRODUCTION In the last few years a number of articles have been published in American law journals on what has been called judicial globalization.1 That term is used to describe the phenomenon of high court judges (whether international, regional, or national) entering into a global conversation by referring to and borrowing from each other and-similar to political leaders-gathering information as they see each other at special meetings or even at summits. Academic literature has so far predominantly focused on human rights and certain criminal law issues such as capital punishment or abortion. This article includes economic law questions. It will first explain that globalization has lead to a homogeneization of legal problems and of legal responses to those problems. It will then discuss the judicial conversation among European high courts. Subsequently, the article will address the question of whether a conversation of judges takes part on the global level. Next, methodological and practical problems will be dealt with. Finally, the issue of whether judicial globalization constitutes a new development will be discussed. In times of globalization, legal problems of the First and of the Third World tend to be compared, in particular in the field of human rights and in certain areas of criminal law due to the increased similarity of social debates, which is favored by advances in global communication. Issues like assisted suicide, abortion, hate speech, gay and lesbian rights, environmental protection, privacy, and the nature of democracy are being placed before judges in different jurisdictions at approximately the same time.2 Economic law problems tend to arise in similar ways, especially in advanced societies and economies, such as the United States, the European Union, the countries of the European Free Trade Association, Canada, and Japan. To a certain extent, this may also be true in the case of threshold economies, i.e., less developed countries that are on the brink of becoming industrialized. Operators who are globally active sometimes face identical legal problems in all or most of the jurisdictions in which they are active. For instance, they produce worldwide, sell their goods and services worldwide, file patent and trademark applications all around the globe, pursue the same or similar marketing strategies, participate in mega-mergers, participate in globally operating cartels, and the like. For a long time, the responses of individual legal orders to these developments were, as a consequence of the concept of a nation-state, different. Increasingly, however, there are fields in which the law in various jurisdictions is (more or less) homogeneous. In this context, the phenomenon of export of law is to be mentioned. Historic examples are the export of the English common law to what has become the Anglo-Saxon world; of the French Civil Code to countries like Italy, Spain, and Portugal (and from the two latter countries to Latin America); and of the German Civil Code to Japan and Greece. After World War II, the most important example has been the export of U.S. law to other parts of the world-in particular, to Japan and to Germany and from Germany to the rest of Europe, especially the European Community (EC).3 The idea of antitrust has been of particular importance. One will remember that, until 1945, Germany was a classical cartel country and that, in France and Italy, the idea of antitrust is relatively recent. Also, the concept of product liability and new types of contracts such as leasing, franchising, or factoring are U.S. exports.4 In particular in the last two decades, there has been a general development toward convergence of many areas of the law. The harmonization process of the European Union with its ramifications in the countries of the European Economic Area and the Eastern European countries that are on the brink of joining the EU stands out. For the sake of order, it is to be noted that Switzerland is refusing to join the European Union and the European Economic Area, but the government launched a comprehensive program of so-called autonomous implementation of EC economic law fifteen years ago. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,017
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,043

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,031
Communication savante0,0170,023
Science ouverte0,0020,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0130,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,259
Écart entre enseignants0,225 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations20
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAlexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen)Même sujetConflict of Laws and JurisdictionTravaux en français237 207