This thesis considers the impact of the major shift to telephone-only services that took place in social welfare legal aid in April 2013. It asks whether changing the method of delivery of social welfare advice from face-to-face to telephone transforms the nature and quality of that advice in ways that are detrimental to the client. The lawyer-client relationship has been a major concern of work carried out previously by law and society scholars. Significantly, none of these commentators considered the impact of the telephone as a sole method of delivery. This research aims to contribute towards filling the gap in the current literature by carrying out an in-depth qualitative study which compares telephone and face-to-face advice in social welfare legal aid. On the basis of empirical data, gathered through interviews and observations involving lawyers, advisers and clients, the thesis identifies three main sets of problems associated with telephone advice. First, local knowledge, community networks and working relationships with opponents put face-to-face lawyers/advisers in a better position to take action on clients’ behalf. Second, the absence of inperson interaction can have a negative impact on the interpersonal elements of the relationship, which can affect clients' willingness to give full instructions. Third, the practical aspects of taking instructions and giving advice are adversely affected by telephone-only delivery, particularly as a result of the absence of non-verbal communication, and the difficulties associated with dealing with documents. The overall conclusion of this research is that some clients are able to overcome the potential barriers of telephone advice, but less capable clients and those with more complex problems are put at a significant disadvantage. In the contemporary situation of scarce resources, this research directly challenges the government rhetoric that changes to the delivery of legal aid target services at those most in need.

This thesis seeks to answer how and why legal institutions, in particular laws, sustain authoritarianism in China. This thesis questions the paradox of law as domination and resistance: laws sustaining the CPC’s adaptive authoritarianism, or opening up avenues for political contestation and bringing about political change. It does so through the study of the political role of labour laws in China, combining an institutionalist perspective with a law and society approach. First, it argues that labour laws have been developed to support the capitalist economy, enforcing property rights and institutionalizing the rule of the Party-state. Second, through ethnographic-oriented research of three case studies of legal aid/labour non-governmental organizations (LAL NGOs) in Beijing, it demonstrates that labour laws, lawyers and LAL NGOs fulfil regime-supportive functions that both display and enable the adaptiveness of the CPC’s authoritarianism. Lawyers and LAL NGOs work within the law to protect workers’ rights and to improve the legal framework, helping to contain labour disputes and maintain social stability. Third, it finds that the legal definitions of rights contrast with workers’ conceptions of rights, the former being based on a capitalist rationale, while the latter is based on concepts of morality, fairness, equality, and on workers’ socio-economic conditions. Studying workers’ perceptions, understandings and uses of the law shows that some workers disagree with the premises of the labour laws, do not find the laws useful for a variety of reasons, and distrust the legal system, putting into question the legitimacy of such institutions of governance. I find that, according to popular conceptions of rights, workers act outside and against the law. The pitfall of the CPC’s ‘adaptive governance’ lies in its simplification of social order into rational legal order, omitting popular conceptions of rights and coherent forms of action that the same laws try to dismiss. Therefore, the space for transformative political action, either to challenge capital or the Party-state, rests outside and against the law.

The criminalization of children commercially-sexually exploited through prostitution persists despite trafficking laws recognizing this as one of the worst forms of exploitation committed against the most vulnerable social group. This thesis examines the re/production of inequalities in American legal discourse on child trafficking, and why child criminalization persists in this context. Employing a child-centered framework built from multi-conscious feminism and the sociologies of law and childhood, it examines mechanisms of othering and criminalization in key legislative debates, statutes and cases of the United States generally as well as two states exemplifying the retributive and child-protective modes of handling child trafficking. It identifies three themes or issues often presented as binaries that structure child trafficking discourse—adult/child, victim/offender and consent/non-consent—and examines how these are deployed to penalize children in general, and minority and immigrant children in particular. First, processes of marginalization related to race, class, gender and immigration have been vital to the construction of childhood (as normative/deviant) in and through trafficking and prostitution laws, which are reproduced through different types of discourses in both states. Second, both retributive and child-protective modes of response preserve child criminalization by maintaining the tension between prostitution and trafficking, and the female culpability associated with prostitution, including through the denial of the victimization of “repeat offenders.” Finally, despite its prohibition, prostitution is conceptualized in contractual terms, which imputes consent to identities constructed through this discourse and renders commercial-sexual exploitation as merely or primarily involving acts of sale, purchase and consumption.

The purpose of this thesis is to analyse the concept of guarantees of non-repetition (GNR) in international law and to consider how to apply GNR in violations of the right to health. GNR are, together with compensation, restitution and satisfaction, forms of reparation. Although international tribunals and UN bodies have increasingly made use of this form of reparation, there is no clarity about both the legal status of the obligation to provide GNR, and the scope and reach of this obligation. Moreover, as economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) are often targeted with the claim that their redress requires complex and expensive forms of reparation, there is a lack of clarity as to whether GNR are applicable to this type of rights and, if they are, how so. This thesis aims to make a twofold contribution to the literature. On the one hand it aims to unpack the elements of the duty of states to provide GNR in international law, whilst on the other, it aims to show a practical application of this form of remedy in a particular ESCR: the right to health. It is argued in this thesis that the obligation to provide GNR has been increasingly recognised in public international law and international human rights law. This thesis will also argue that GNR are best granted in cases of large-scale, gross and serious violations of human rights and when there is a risk of repetition. It will also argue that GNR are equally applicable to all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights; and that there is nothing in either the nature or the concept of the right to health that prevents the application of GNR to the redress of violations to the this right.

Technology has supposed a profound paradigm shift in human evolution, following Haraway’s cyborg metaphor we have forged a profound psycho-social rapport machines. This connectivity has also brought changes in crime patterns and fostered the development of cybercrime. From a criminological perspective, this work aims to explore the role of Per-Olof Wikströms Situational Action Theory in explaining cybercrime by including Syke and Matza’s neutralisation techniques in its formulation. The SAT-RI (SAT- Revised for the Internet) takes into consideration the interaction between cyber-crime propensity (based essentially in moral perceptions), the internet, neutralisation techniques (cognitive scripts used as protection against blame) and self-control. The theory was tested by using a mixed methods design that includes an online survey (N=709) and case studies (N=20) stemming from interviews with law enforcement agents. Once the data was analysed, it was demonstrated that individuals with low self-control tend to have higher cybercrime propensity and are more prone to justify their acts by using adequate neutralisations. In addition, there are differences in the perceptions of cybercriminals by law enforcement agents depending on whether they are fraudsters, child sex abusers, sex abusers or hackers. The resulting theory can be useful in terms of prevention, as it can help design programmes that focus on the different stages of the cybercrime process (self-control, propensity or neutralisation). Also, the thesis calls for a more anthropological conception of cybercriminology called cyborg criminology.

This is an investigation into the methods and techniques used by Lord Denning in pursuit of his notion of doing justice to the case in front of him. The thesis examines Denning’s upbringing and biography to attempt to identify incidents and influences on his character which may have shown themselves in his later judicial career. The thesis then examines his judicial style and philosophy to attempt to isolate a theory of adjudication which accounts for some of his decisions. The theory of the interstitial spaces within the law wherein judges are entitled to exercise their discretion in coming to judgement is examined. This is then set against Denning’s actions in three cases which are examined at length to analyse his methods of obtaining the space to exercise his discretion and then the way he actually exercised that discretion is examined and analysed. There is in analysis of the legitimacy of each of these exercises of discretion and the legacy of each of them (if any). The conclusion pulls all these threads together and expounds a theory of adjudication that may fit these decisions and his judicial style and then analyses this theory against the background of modern jurisprudential thought.

The general area of this research is shipping law, more specifically the law governing the carriage of goods by sea. The research has been narrowed down to the implications of terms into contracts of affreightment, and then further narrowed down to the concept of deviation. The specific research question is whether or not the concept of deviation is still relevant to the law governing the carriage of goods by sea in the modern era. While this question has been posed before in the academic literature, it has never been discussed in sufficient depth. The researcher was therefore able to identify gaps in the literature through the literature review which the research has attempted to fill. The thesis on which the research is based is that the principle of deviation is a long standing and very important rule of law which form an integral part of the law and practice governing the carriage of goods by sea. However, a multi-jurisdictional review of both primary sources (i.e. conventions, statutes and cases) and secondary sources (academic literature) in relation to deviation indicates that there are many conceptual, legal and practical problems associated with the principle. Adding to this problem is the concept of quasi deviation in some jurisdictions such as the United States where there continues to be conflicting approaches to the concept even within the various federal circuits. Therefore the hypothesis of this study is based on the need for legal reform. Chapters 1 and 2 provide the background to the study as well as the conceptual framework for the research, including the literature review. The main research aims, objectives and research questions are addressed in Chapters 3, 4 and 5. Chapter 6 concludes the research by presenting the findings and recommendations together with an outline of the research contribution.

Folklore, as a specific part of the traditional heritage, forms one of the constituent elements of the cultural identity of every community. As such, expressions of folklore ought to be preserved and protected from uncontrolled and inappropriate utilisation. The problem of an adequate system of protection of folklore has been discussed over the last few decades, yet, it seems that, up to date, legislative solutions fail to entirely efficiently and comprehensively deal with this issue. At the same time, somewhat unfairly, mainly the indigenous communities have been the focus of most of these scientific and legislative approaches over the past decades. Predominant part of the existing literature and normative models of protection have used the indigenous communities as a starting point in developing folklore protection systems and schemes, leaving many other non-indigenous communities with rich folkloric opus on the margins of the attention. On account of this, one may argue that the proposed legislative solutions are not fully operational for both indigenous and non-indigenous communities. Recognising the above, and at the same time aware that folklore does not only exist in isolated parts of the world but is present in every nation and in every culture, the main focus of this thesis is to examine the protection of folklore from a specific perspective, that of the overlooked non-indigenous communities. At the same time, this thesis also looks into answering certain currently unrequited issues, aiding in that way to the development of a more globally appropriate system of protection of expressions of folklore.

Copyright law grants exclusive rights to right-holders which prevent others from exploiting copyright-protected works without authorisation. However, this right is not absolute. Legislation includes specific exceptions which preclude right-holders from exercising their prerogatives in particular cases which foster creativity and cultural diversity within that society. The parody exception pertains to this ultimate objective by permitting users to reproduce copyright-protected materials for the purpose of parody. While the parody exception is not harmonised at international level, the EU Information Society Directive offers EU Member States the option of including a parody exception within national copyright legislation as part of a harmonising framework. The UK took advantage of this option, and introduced a new copyright exception for parody in October 2014. To understand the meaning and scope of the new exception in UK copyright law and to analyse whether EU harmonisation of the parody exception is achievable, this thesis examines and compares four jurisdictions which differ in their protection of parodies: France, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. This thesis is concerned with finding an appropriate balance between the protection afforded to right-holders and the public interest in encouraging parody. This is achieved by analysing the parody exception to the economic rights of right-holders, the application of moral rights and the interaction of the parody exception with contract law. As parodies constitute an artistic expression protected under the right to freedom of expression, this thesis considers the influence of freedom of expression on the interpretation of this specific copyright exception. Furthermore, this thesis aims to provide guidance on how to resolve conflicts where fundamental rights are in conflict.

Historical narratives have limited scholarly appreciation of the impact of rhetoric on the development of Roman law in the late Republican period. This thesis challenges these narratives and attempts to re-evaluate the role of rhetoric in Roman law.