This thesis examines approaches to establishing liability in corporate groups. It considers the problem that arises when an insolvent subsidiary's tort creditors suffer personal injury, and try to pursue recourse against other group companies - especially the parent company. Courts have tried to provide answers regarding the parent company's liability for the torts of their subsidiaries, but have had limited success. The thesis reveals difficulty in extending liability to the parent company by way of insolvency law provisions, and by piercing the corporate veil. It recounts the hesitation of the courts in broadening their perspective beyond individual companies, so as to take the group itself as the responsible entity. The thesis points, furthermore, to shortcomings in proposals for a new rule of unlimited pro rata liability. Motivated by the inadequacy of current solutions to this pressing group problem, the thesis explores alternative tort law remedies under an approach suggested by the Supreme Court in the leading cases of VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and others and Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd. Chapter III discusses the role of tort of negligence in establishing the parent company's liability. The work analyses case law decisions on how to widen the application of negligence in the corporate group context, and compares UK law with relevant United States' and Australian case law. Since this group problem involves multiple legal entities, Chapters IV and V evaluate the possibility of using the doctrine of joint tortfeasance and/or the theory of vicarious liability in establishing the parent company's liability for its subsidiary company's torts. These two doctrines' extensions in corporate tort cases are seldom discussed in the literature. To conclude, tort law solutions, especially the doctrines of tort of negligence and joint tortfeasance based on participations are recommended to be further developed for corporate tort problems.

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.

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.

The Criminal Corporate Liability The definition of legal person is not outlined in criminal law, but can be found in Section 18, Subsection 2 of the Civil Code. Corporate criminal liability is then a concept that has been newly introduced to the Czech statutory criminal law, what has caused a certain intrusion of the system of basic principles of criminal law, mainly the principle of individual criminal responsibility. The term "imputability" appears, which means that a conduct of agents or other persons designated in the Act on Criminal Liability of Legal Persons and Proceedings Against Them (further as "the Act") can be imputed to a legal person, if the physical person is culpable for the conduct and the conduct causes imputability of the criminal offence to the legal person. Intensive discussions on necessity and suitability of implementation of the concept of corporate criminal liability into the Czech legal system had preceded the adoption of the Act in 2011. Such discussion can now be considered as overcome, as it is obvious that the Czech Republic has opted for the direction towards the "true" corporate criminal liability. Arguments for and against the adoption of the Act can nevertheless help to better understand the concept itself, as well as the context in which it has been introduced. It...

La participation de personnes privées à des opérations militaires n’est pas récente et s’est longtemps illustrée par le phénomène des mercenaires, mais elle a pris beaucoup d’ampleur depuis les années 1990 et le recours à des sociétés militaires privées. Ces sociétés se voient confier des tâches qui ne sont pas directement liées au cœur de métier des armées étatiques, mais certaines d’entre elles peuvent concerner des prestations armées. Le recours à des personnes privées dans le cadre d’opérations militaires soulève de nombreuses difficultés juridiques. Il est en effet essentiel de déterminer le droit qui est applicable à ces personnes, qu’elles soient qualifiées de mercenaires ou qu’il s’agisse d’employés de sociétés militaires privées. La définition de leur statut est quant à elle fondamentale afin d’examiner la possibilité de retenir leur responsabilité en cas de nécessité. La question de la responsabilité des sociétés militaires privées elles-mêmes est également posée, tout comme celle, primordiale, de la responsabilité des États qui emploient de telles sociétés. / Private persons whether individuals or legal entities have always taken part in military operations and the best and most famous example was the one of mercenaries. But, since the 1990’s, this participation has been renewed by the increasing activity of the private military companies. These companies have contracts for various tasks and some of them are directly linked to armed missions. The participation of private entities in military operations raises a lot of legal questions. It is necessary to as certain the law which will apply to them, whether they are mercenaries or employees of private military companies. The definition of their status is also crucial in order to determine the liability for their acts. Several fundamental questions arise not only as far the liability of these companies is concerned but also, and perhaps even more, as far as the liability of States employing these companies is concerned.

<p>This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The&nbsp / proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. <br /> &nbsp / </p>

<p>This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The&nbsp / proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. <br /> &nbsp / </p>

This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. / Magister Legum - LLM

Magister Legum - LLM (Criminal Justice and Procedure) / Traditionally, domestic criminal law was focused on individual guilt as can be seen from the principles of punishment, which are closely linked to blameworthiness and the infliction of loss or punishment to the offender. It most often requires the proof of the offender's mental state at the time of the committing the offence. Due to the emergence of the concept of legal persona, there has emerged a framework of imputing criminal liability on entities with legal personality. This concept has gained momentum in the domestic criminal law systems of many countries. The modern-day development of corporate criminal responsibility (CCR) emerged from the common law countries and has undergone a series of developments. Various models of imputing liability on a corporation have been developed with the United Kingdom having recently passed laws for serious offences like corporate manslaughter.

Magister Legum - LLM / This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. / South Africa