This doctoral thesis argues for the reform of the Irish law on adverse possession. It explains why the doctrine, in its current state, fails to confer adequate protection on the owner against the dangers of losing title to an adverse possessor and it illustrates how the law permits 'undeserving' adverse possessors to acquire title. The analysis of the law is conducted by relying on doctrinal and empirical research methodologies. Although a number of reform options are considered, this thesis makes the case for the introduction of a qualified veto system of adverse possession which would govern land that has been registered in the Land Registry and also unregistered land. This reform would permit the owner of land to veto an adverse possession application unless the applicant qualifies under one of the exceptions formulated to the proposed scheme which are designed to preserve the operation of the doctrine for certain 'deserving' adverse possessors. Adverse possessors who enter possession pursuant to an informal or a defective title, or adverse possessors of boundary land which they believe to be their own, would be entitled to be registered as owners, regardless of an objection by the owner. In formulating these exceptions, the thesis examines the modern role played by adverse possession in resolving different types of land law disputes, its suitability as a remedy and, where appropriate, the challenges involved in introducing a qualification to the veto system. The introduction of a veto system of adverse possession would also permit abandoned land to be brought back onto the market. While the thesis is devoted primarily to an examination of the Irish law in this area, it also engages in a comparative analysis of discrete aspects of the law in a number of other common law jurisdictions, namely England and Wales, Canada, Australia and the United States.

The Antidumping and Countervailing Duty laws are competition policy instruments with which the United States ostensibly seeks to promote the role of market forces, enhance competition and thereby uphold the post-war international economic order. However, through a combination of administrative pragmatism and statutory emendation, these trade laws have evolved into instruments with which the United States impedes market forces and insulates its domestic economy from the very competition these laws supposedly aim to encourage. This is a paradox. Important political issues arise from this paradox which are obscured by the traditional methods of examining trade policy. This dissertation demonstrates that the political aspects can be made apparent if the laws are thought of as instruments of economic statecraft. Through an original application of the theoretical framework David Baldwin has developed in Economic Statecraft, it is argued that the trade remedy laws utilize state power for the purpose of changing the behaviour, beliefs, policies and propensities to act of foreign governments or firms. By examining the detail inherent in the two statutes it is demonstrated that far from compelling foreigners to abide by market forces and undertake competitive trade practices, the US penalizes them for doing so. On the pretext that foreigners' trade practices are "unfair", the US is compelling them to engage in genuinely anticompetitive practices. Competition is the central mechanism of the post-war international trade system. Therefore, the United States is undermining that order with its use of these instruments of statecraft. Further, remedy policy is generating political conflict between the US and its major trading partners because there is fundamental disagreement as to the normal and appropriate role for governments and firms to play in a modern market economy. Differences of opinion about what is "unfair" in this context arise, as is demonstrated, on political grounds rather than economic ones.

No description available.

This research project purports to offer a comprehensive analysis of how the legal framework in Saudi Arabia might be improved to further the development and efficacy of the housing finance market. The research aims to achieve the following objectives: enhancing the efficiency of the main participants, lender and borrower, in the housing finance market by providing them with the desired protection; facilitating access to that market; building up a proper regulatory framework for governing the market; and finally, addressing the legal barriers that hinder the provision of cheap liquidity in the market. Although the Housing Finance Laws (HFLs) 2012 were introduced and enacted with similar objectives in mind, this thesis argues that four issues still present significant obstacles to the development of the housing finance market, albeit some are a result of the provisions of the HFLs themselves. As a consequence, the thesis has sought to address the following questions; what barriers to the development of the housing finance remain unaddressed? How should Saudi law be reformed to provide adequate protection for lender and borrower in the market? Can the Land Fees Law 2016 play a critical role in addressing the current issue of increasing land prices which hinders access to the housing finance market? How can the regulatory framework for regulating the housing finance market in general, and for adopting the macro-prudential policy in particular, be developed to achieve the HFLs’ aims? And, finally, how might Saudi laws be reformed to enable the launch of a securitisation market, in order to assist in the development of the housing finance market by providing new means of liquidity? It is hoped that critical analysis of the above questions will help to facilitate development of the housing finance market and contribute to its further improvement, by addressing potentially workable solutions to the obstacles listed above.

The study set out to explore the concept of Islamic Project Finance (IPF) and to examine its main legal and regulatory challenges in Saudi Arabia (KSA). Having as a primary objective the development and improvement of IPF in the project finance market in KSA, the thesis consists of a theoretical, conceptual study of Islamic project finance, before examining the current performance of IFIs in project finance, and eventually identifying the most prominent legal and regulatory challenges of IPF. The theoretical part, which spreads in the first three chapters, examines the concept of conventional project finance and how close it is to the principle and philosophy of Islamic finance. It is argued that the project finance mechanism is the most suitable financial tool for the objectives of Islamic finance. It is established that not only both mechanisms share similar underlying philosophies in different aspects, for instance the risk-sharing and profit generation methods, but also, in terms of principle, none of the rules of Islamic finance would be breached or violated by project finance, and most of its rules could be easily adapted. In the examination of the current performance of IPF and its regulatory and legal challenges in KSA, this study argues that the absence of sound regulation and standardisation for the Islamic finance industry has been having a detrimental impact on the efficiency and productivity of Islamic finance in the project finance market. The legal limbo the industry has found itself into not only creates a number of serious challenges, including sharia-compliance, inconsistency among SSBs, and sharia governance over IFI products in the event of dispute, but also hinders any ambition to operate in the highest level, while holding its principles and philosophy. From the analysis emerges the conclusion that three essential strategies will allow the IPF industry to develop and thrive in the project finance market: the increase of equity finance investments, the reconsideration of the traditional project finance structure, and the standardisation and regulation of the Islamic finance industry.

This research is focused on the current crisis that is taking place between Mexico’s civil society and the armed forces in the context of the “war against drugs”. In 2006 the federal government initiated a security strategy focused on the militarization of the enforcement against organised criminal groups that specialise in drug-trafficking. At the same time the number of civilian complaints for human rights abuses attributed to military personnel increased exponentially. Ten years later, the same policies are in force and the soldiers keep being accused of severe human rights violations. The aim of this project is to develop a theoretical framework that will provide the elements needed to reform the current Mexican legal frameworks and military institutions, in order to improve the relationship between the armed forces and civil society. To develop new theory, this research addresses the social background of the conflict and analyses contemporary concepts and frameworks that shape the topic of civil-military relations both at a domestic and international level. Subsequently, the cases of the German post-WWII military institutional reforms and the emergency legal regime in Northern Ireland during the 1960s and 70s are studied and analysed. This provides the elements to do a legal comparison with the current Mexican legal codes and institutions. The result produces the theory needed to develop reforms that have the potential to shape a new civil-military relations paradigm in Mexico.

Any system or tribunal that exercises judicial power in a democratic society must comply with certain minimum standards for the administration of justice. In international human rights law, these standards are embedded in the right to a fair trial which undoubtedly is the most important prerequisite for ensuring justice in the adjudication of cases. This thesis examines the extent to which Uganda's military justice system complies with the right to a fair trial. It questions the competence, independence and impartiality of Uganda's military tribunals and generally casts strong doubt on the country's current military justice system to administer fair justice according to the minimum international human rights standards. It is argued that despite attempts at reform, Uganda's military justice system is still largely stuck in its historical origins and falls far too short of complying with the country's international human rights obligations concerning the right to a fair trial. The thesis points out areas that require reform and provides recommendations which can help to make Uganda's military justice system compliant with the country's international human rights obligations concerning the right to a fair trial, in particular the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal. Ensuring that the administration of military justice complies with the right to a fair trial is not only an international obligation which Uganda is obliged to fulfill, but could also help it to achieve effective and sustained military discipline - which is the main reason advanced for the existence of military justice as a separate system of administration of justice.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.