The thesis explores the concept of International Arbitration, an alternative to litigation. It argues the benefits and the inherent limitations parties are likely to face while resorting to this instrument to resolve Transfer of Technology and Intellectual Property related disputes. The paper further explains how Arbitrability limitations can be taken care of in relation to transfer of technology disputes. Emphasis is placed on the institutional role of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Arbitration and Mediation Center as an appropriate arbitration forum to deal with complex technological and Intellectual Property related disputes.

A special role amongst various efforts to combat transnational criminal activity belongs to extradition, which has transformed into a form of international cooperation and became an indispensable tool for ensuring criminal responsibility in any part of the world. However, for a long period of time, an individual in the process of extradition has been treated as a passive object of intergovernmental relations which have a significant political component. In this thesis, the claim is that treatment of an individual as a rights bearer and an active subject of legal relationships among other parties of the process, combined with transfer of final decision-making right from the executive to judiciary branch of power, is capable to enable application of the Rule of law principles to particular extradition cases, limit broad discretion of decision makers and minimize political component of extradition.

Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, [2007] 1 S.C.R. 333, 2007 SCC 7, creates a new causation doctrine in Canadian negligence law that is available to plaintiffs only in exceptional cases. Under this doctrine, negligence and the possibility of specific factual causation may be sufficient to satisfy the causation requirements of a cause of action in negligence. Proof of specific factual causation on the balance of probability is not required. The justification for this doctrine is fairness and justice. The application of the doctrine does not produce a decision that the negligence did cause the injury. Where the requirements of the Resurfice doctrine are satisfied, the causation requirements of the cause of action are deemed to be satisfied despite the finding that factual causation was not established on the balance of probability. The authorities cited are current to June 21, 2012.

This paper explores the interrelationships among corporate culture, capital structure, firm performance, and fiduciary duties. Chaos theory, nonlinear dynamics, complex systems theory, and socio-cultural studies of firms’ organizational ecosystems, and enabling infrastructure suggest that the BCE rule is: (i) a superior fiduciary principle to shareholder primacy; and (ii) more likely to enhance firm value in proportion to the importance of intangible assets in its production process. The existence of “epistatic costs” rooted in the non-linear negative feedback effects of perverse agency theory-driven cost cutting is hypothesized. A theoretical model is developed to empirically test for the existence of epistatic costs and optimal levels of organizational tension or “slack.” Broader implications of the model for fiduciary rules, financing decisions, and the current posture of Canadian securities regulation in the takeover context are explored.

This thesis explores the role played by law in the current breakdown of the employment pension system, focusing on the legal status of pension plans within the employment relationship, and on the way lawmakers have defined, shaped and enforced employee pension rights. It traces the legal status of employment pensions from their 19th Century characterization as gifts to reward employees for long and faithful service, to their current 21st Century construction as terms of the contract of employment. The thesis argues that Canadian lawmakers within all three legal regimes structuring rights and obligations within the employment relationship – the common law, collective bargaining law and statute law – have contributed significantly to the overall dysfunction of the system by cultivating both substantive and procedural legal rules that locate critical issues concerning the scope, design, durability and distribution of employee pension rights within the control of employers. Predictably, Canadian employers have used that control to shape pension plans to meet their distinct business needs, needs that frequently collide with worker needs and expectations for good pensions. Even in the heyday of the ‘Fordist’ work structures that fostered employment pension plans, the system delivered benefits very unequally, privileging the interest of elite workers who fit the ‘male breadwinner’ mould, and failing to provide adequate and secure pensions for the majority of Canadian workers. Changes in the organization of work in Canada, including trends towards more precarious work, will continue to exacerbate the problems inherent in the system, escalating its distributional inequalities. In the current round of pension law reform, Canada’s policy makers should abandon the effort to repair a system which is flawed at its core, and should instead seek a new foundation for pensions outside the employment relationship, a foundation which will not subordinate the pension interests of workers to the business interests of employers.

The legal treatises of the Kingdom of Jerusalem were written in the thirteenth century, when most of the kingdom had been re-conquered by the Muslims. There are no treatises from the twelfth century, when the kingdom was at its height. The thirteenth-century jurists claimed that the kingdom had always had written laws, but they may have been making this up for political purposes. The treatises also discuss issues important to the noble class of which the jurists were a part: property rights and the feudal services owed to the king, as well as the proper way to plead their cases in court. But what do they say about criminal law, and laws for the lower classes? How were crimes tried and punished in the twelfth century, and did this differ from the laws recorded in the thirteenth century? Chapter one deals with the different treatises, and their claim that there was a set of laws called “Letres dou Sepulcre” in the twelfth century. The most important of the treatises for criminal law, the assizes of the burgess court, is examined in detail. Chapter two looks at the small number of laws that survive from the twelfth century, in charters, the canons of the Council of Nablus, and the chronicle of William of Tyre. Chapter three is a study of other descriptions of crusader law in the twelfth century, including those by Christian and Muslim pilgrims, and especially the observations of Usama ibn Munqidh. These accounts are tied together by the common theme of theft and the ways that thieves could be punished. Chapter four deals with cases mentioned by thirteenth-century sources, including theft, assault, and prostitution, but especially cases that led to trials by battle. The usefulness of such trials for dating some of the laws is also examined. The conclusion demonstrates that certain parts of the assizes relating to criminal law must have already existed in the twelfth century, and offers some tentative ideas about the specific origin of the laws. Avenues for future research are also introduced.

The law too often avoids or misuses statistical evidence. This problem is partially explained by the absence of a shared normative framework for working with such evidence. There is considerable disagreement within the legal community about how statistical evidence relates to legal inquiry. It is proposed that the first step to addressing the problem is to accept Bayesianism as a normative framework that leads to outcomes that largely align with legal intuitions. It is only once this has been accepted that we can proceed to encourage education about common conceptual errors involving statistical evidence as well as techniques to limit their occurrence. Objections to using Bayesianism in the legal context are addressed. It is argued that the objection based on the irrelevance of statistical evidence is fundamentally incoherent in its failure to identify most evidence as statistical. Second, objections to the incompleteness of a Bayesian approach in accounting for non-truth-related values do place legitimate limits on the use of Bayesianism in the law but in no way undermine its normative usefulness. Lastly, many criticisms of the role of Bayesianism in the law rest on misunderstandings of the meaning and manipulation of statistical evidence and are best addressed by presenting statistical evidence in ways that encourage correct understanding. Once it is accepted that, put in its proper place, a Bayesian approach to understanding statistical evidence can align with most fundamental legal intuitions, a less fearful approach to the use of statistical evidence in the law can emerge.

It is the purpose of this Thesis to start an analysis of metaconstitutional review, understood as the process through which an entity such as a Constitutional Court or Supreme Court reviews the compliance of the acts of the Constituent with superior values or fills constitutional gaps with such values. This, in order to explain its separate nature from constitutional review, to determine whether it is compatible with the traditional conception of popular sovereignty as the ultimate source of power and the legitimizing element of the constitutional system and to determine whether or not metaconstitutional review could prevent social change by entrenching certain values.

This paper argues that “enlightened shareholder value” (“ESV”) offers a “third way” between the shareholder primacy and stakeholder theories of the corporation; one that maintains the creation of shareholder value as the corporation’s primary function, but requires directors to take into account the environmental impact of the corporations’ operations. ESV requires directors to “have regard to”, among other things, “the impact of the company’s operations on…the environment.” The obligation to “have regard to” should be interpreted as a procedural duty requiring directors to inform themselves as to the environmental impact of the corporation’s operations, which may in itself cause directors to reallocate corporate resources to environmental protection. ESV may also improve corporations’ environmental disclosure and impact social norms of corporate behaviour with respect to the environment. Any negative impact of ESV on present shareholder returns is justified by the obligation to avoid imposing foreseeable severe or irreparable environmental harm on future generations.

Currently there are no mechanisms under international criminal law to hold corporations accountable for their role in the commission of human rights abuses. A primary problem with establishing corporate liability under international law, is that it is unclear how to attribute liability to corporations for international crimes. This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of domestic principles of corporate attribution utilized in Canada, the United States, Britain and Australia. The domestic principles are then reconciled with current international law principles and enumerated crimes of international criminal law. It is argued that a flexible approach is optimal for the imposition of corporate liability under international law. While some of the domestic principles work better than others at first glance, ultimately all can and should be used at international law to end impunity for corporate crimes.