DOCSLIB.ORG

Masterproef Van Jurgen Goossens

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Masterproef Van Jurgen Goossens Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid Universiteit Gent Academiejaar 2010-11 Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling inzake justitie Toepassing van rechtseconomische principes Masterproef van de opleiding „Master in de rechten‟ Ingediend door Jurgen Goossens (studentennr. 00600059) (major: nationaal en internationaal publiekrecht en milieurecht) Promotor: Prof. Boudewijn Bouckaert Co-promotor: Prof. Matthias Storme Commissaris: Prof. Ben Depoorter Inhoudsopgave Lijst van gebruikte afkortingen ............................................................................................................... 7 Inleiding ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Hoofdstuk 1. Rechtsvergelijkend onderzoek naar de mogelijkheden qua bevoegdheidsverdeling ........ 11 Afdeling 1. Relevantie van rechtsvergelijking van federale stelsels ................................................. 11 Afdeling 2. Verenigde Staten ........................................................................................................... 11 §1. Gerechtelijke organisatie ....................................................................................................... 11 A. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheid tot organisatie van de rechtsbedeling .................................. 11 A.1 Parallelle rechtsgang..................................................................................................... 12 A.2 Federale rechtbanken .................................................................................................... 12 A.3 (Deel)statelijke rechtbanken ......................................................................................... 13 A.4 Bevoegdheidsverdeling tussen de federale en deelstatelijke rechtbanken..................... 13 B. Deelstatelijke inspraak bij de benoeming van leden van de hoogste federale rechtscolleges ................................................................................................................................................ 15 C. Inrichting van de rechterlijke macht door de deelstaten en het statuut van hun magistraten ................................................................................................................................................ 15 §2. Procesrecht ............................................................................................................................ 15 §3. Evaluatie ................................................................................................................................ 16 Afdeling 3. Duitsland ....................................................................................................................... 16 §1. Gerechtelijke organisatie ....................................................................................................... 16 A. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheid tot organisatie van de rechtsbedeling .................................. 17 A.1 Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling ...................................................................... 17 A.2 Federaal Grondwettelijk Hof ........................................................................................ 18 A.3 Aparte, nevengeschikte rechtsmachten ......................................................................... 18 A.4 Hoogste aanleg of „revisie‟ ........................................................................................... 19 B. Deelstatelijke inspraak bij de benoeming van leden van de hoogste federale rechtscolleges ................................................................................................................................................ 19 C. Inrichting van de rechterlijke macht door de deelstaten en het statuut van hun magistraten ................................................................................................................................................ 19 §2. Procesrecht ............................................................................................................................ 20 §3. Evaluatie ................................................................................................................................ 20 Afdeling 4. Zwitserland ................................................................................................................... 21 §1. Gerechtelijke organisatie ....................................................................................................... 21 A. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheid tot organisatie van de rechtsbedeling .................................. 21 A.1 Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling ...................................................................... 21 A.2 Federale en kantonale rechtbanken ............................................................................... 21 1 B. Deelstatelijke inspraak bij de benoeming van leden van de hoogste federale rechtscolleges ................................................................................................................................................ 22 C. Inrichting van de rechterlijke macht door de deelstaten en het statuut van hun magistraten ................................................................................................................................................ 22 §2. Procesrecht ............................................................................................................................ 23 §3. Evaluatie ................................................................................................................................ 23 Afdeling 5. Spanje ........................................................................................................................... 23 §1. Gerechtelijke organisatie ....................................................................................................... 23 A. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheid tot organisatie van de rechtsbedeling .................................. 23 A.1 Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling ...................................................................... 23 A.2 Statuut van autonomie van Catalonië ........................................................................... 24 B. Deelstatelijke inspraak bij de benoeming van leden van de hoogste federale rechtscolleges ................................................................................................................................................ 24 C. Benoeming van federale rechters met rechtsmacht beperkt tot het grondgebied van de deelentiteiten ........................................................................................................................... 25 §2. Procesrecht ............................................................................................................................ 25 §3. Evaluatie ................................................................................................................................ 25 Afdeling 6. Beknopte bespreking van Oostenrijk, India, Canada, Mexico, Australië en Argentinië 25 §1. Oostenrijk .............................................................................................................................. 25 §2. India ....................................................................................................................................... 26 §3. Canada ................................................................................................................................... 26 §4. Mexico ................................................................................................................................... 27 §5. Australië ................................................................................................................................ 28 §6. Argentinië .............................................................................................................................. 28 Afdeling 7. Conclusie uit het rechtsvergelijkend materiaal .............................................................. 29 §1. Gerechtelijke organisatie ....................................................................................................... 29 A. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheid tot organisatie van de rechtsbedeling .................................. 29 B. Deelstatelijke inspraak bij de benoeming van leden van de hoogste federale rechtscolleges ................................................................................................................................................ 30 C. Organisatie van de rechterlijke macht door de deelstaten en het statuut van hun magistraten ................................................................................................................................................ 30 §2. Procesrecht ............................................................................................................................ 31 Hoofdstuk 2. Institutionele omkadering van de Belgische justitiële bevoegdheidsverdeling ................ 32 Afdeling 1. Staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling ....................................................................... 32 §1. Subsidiariteitsbeginsel ........................................................................................................... 32 §2. Artikel 35 GW: de fata morgana van een logische Belgische staatsrechtelijke bevoegdheidsverdeling ...............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 28102259-101 Principles of European Law on Commercial
    Principles of European Law on Commercial Agency, Franchise and Distribution Contracts (PEL CAFDC) Principles of European Law Study Group on a European Civil Code Commercial Agency, Franchise and Distribution Contracts (PEL CAFDC) prepared by Martijn W. Hesselink Jacobien W. Rutgers Odavia Bueno Díaz Manola Scotton Muriel Veldman with advice from the Advisory Council approved by the Co-ordinating Group Sellier. Stæmpfli European Law Publishers Publishers Ltd. Berne The Dutch Working Team Georgios Arnokouros LL M (Greek Law), Professor Maurits Barendrecht (Team Leader), Lic. Rui Miguel Prista Patrı´cio Casca˜o (Portuguese Law), Odavia Bueno Diaz LL M Leuven (Spanish Law), John Dickie (Team Manager Utrecht, English Law, until 2002), Giuseppe Donatello, Professor Martijn Hesselink (Team Leader), Dr. Viola Heutger (Team Manager Utrecht), Professor Ewoud Hondius (Team Leader), Dr. Christoph Jeloschek (Austrian Law), Roland Lohnert (until June 2002), Prof. Marco Loos (Team Manager Tilburg), Dr. Andrea Pinna (French Law), Dr. Jacobien Rutgers (Team Manager Amsterdam, since April 2001), Dott.ssa. Manola Scotton (Italian Law), Dr. Hanna Sivesand (Swedish Law), Mr. Muriel Veldman (Dutch Law), Mr. Hester Wattendorff (Team Manager Amsterdam, until July 2000), Aneta Wiewiorowska (Polish law) External Reporters: Dr. Andre Jansen (Mnster) (German law), Dr. Soili Nysten-Haarala, (Finnish reporter) The Advisory Council on Commercial Agency, Franchise and Distribution Contracts Professor Johny Herre (Stockholm), Professor Je´roˆme Huet (Paris), Professor Ewan McKendrick (Oxford), Professor Peter Schlechtriem (Freiburg i.Br.), Professor Hugh Beale (London/Warwick), Professor Christina Ramberg (Stockholm) The Co-ordinating Group Professor Guido Alpa (Genua/Rome), Professor Kaspars Balodis (Riga, since December 2004), Professor Christian v. Bar (Osnabrck), Professor Maurits Barendrecht (Tilburg), Professor Hugh Beale (London), Professor Michael Joachim Bonell (Rome), Professor Mifsud G.
    [Show full text]
  • EVS-Bibliography 07/2018 - - [email protected]
    - EVS-Bibliography 07/2018 - http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu - http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu/ [email protected] Table of Contents Journal Articles .........................................................................................................................................................2 Books ..................................................................................................................................................................... 61 Book Chapters ....................................................................................................................................................... 75 Conference Papers .............................................................................................................................................. 114 Dissertations ........................................................................................................................................................ 118 Master's Theses ................................................................................................................................................... 121 Working Paper ..................................................................................................................................................... 123 Miscellaneous ...................................................................................................................................................... 126 - EVS-Bibliography 07/2018 - http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu
    [Show full text]
  • Johan Terryn Zijn Punkers Passé?
    studentenblad Universiteit Antwerpen Nummer 37 - jaargang 6 Maart 2007 dwars GRATIS Evaluatie van het vak Levensbeschouwing Johan Terryn Zijn punkers passé? Asielcentrum Linkeroever Colofon dwars is het studentenblad van de Uni- Hoofdredacteur: Ciska Hoet. Vincken (verantwoordelijke), Evelien Wouters. E-mail: [email protected] versiteit Antwerpen, gemaakt voor en Redactiesecretaris: Delphine De Pauw. Illustraties: Dimitri Sakelaropolos. Website: www.dwars.ua.ac.be door haar studenten. Vragen, opmerkingen en suggesties zijn Eindredactie: Stijn Cools, Astrid De Wit, Puzzelredactie: Raf Bocklandt. van harte welkom, alsook lezersbrieven. dwars verschijnt maandelijks tijdens het Matthias Meersmans (verantwoordelijke), Vormgeving: Folker Debusscher, Delphine Anonieme brieven komen echter niet in academiejaar en wordt gratis verdeeld Jonas Vincken. De Pauw, Ciska Hoet, Ward Joppen (verant- aanmerking. De redactie behoudt het op de UA-campussen Drie Eiken, Groe- woordelijke), Jef Leyssens, Jonas Vincken, Tom Redactie: Kirsten Cornelissen, Folker recht om ingezonden stukken in te korten nenborger, Middelheim en Stad. Vingerhoets. Debusscher, Niels Govaerts, Hendrik Jan, of niet te plaatsen. Oplage: 3.500 exemplaren. Ward Joppen, Mehdi Koocheki, Jef Leys- Werkten mee aan dit nummer: Bart Braem, sens, Raïssa Mvuyekure, Sabeth Snijders, Charis De Craene, Lieze Lingier en Lin Redactielokaal en correspondentieadres: V.U.: Ciska Hoet, Paardenmarkt 91, bus 1 Jef Van Hoofstat, Evelien Wouters, Ruud Louage. dwars - studentenblad UA B-2000 Antwerpen. Wouters. Drukkerij: Wilda nv, Deurne Paardenmarkt 91, kot 1 B-2000 Antwerpen Fotografie: Rudina Coraj, Jef Leyssens, Jonas 2 De BaMa-hervormingen hebben werkbelasting van onze administratieve Cartoon 2 al veel stof doen opwaaien. De medewerkers de voorbije jaren expo- door de overheid opgelegde ver- nentieel is toegenomen.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Vulnérabilité Des Droits Humains En Temps De Crise
    Rapport annuel 2020 Vulnérabilité des droits humains en temps de crise Pour l’égalité, contre la discrimination Rapport annuel 2020 Vulnérabilité des droits humains en temps de crise Pour l’égalité, contre la discrimination 2 Sommaire Avant-propos 4 12 Mission et vision 6 2 Promouvoir l’égalité Travailler ensemble à l’égalité en période de distanciation sociale 13 1. Emploi 14 1.1 Diversité sur le marché de l’emploi : nos recommandations 14 Événements 1.2 Formations dans des entreprises, des 8 organisations et des administrations 15 marquants en 2020 1.3 eDiv : quelques clics pour une meilleure 1 politique de diversité 16 1. Formation du gouvernement 9 1.4 Monitoring socio-économique : un diplôme n’est pas toujours une garantie de réussite 17 1.1 Gouvernement d’urgence Wilmès 9 1.5 Collaboration avec des partenaires sociaux 18 1.2 Gouvernement fédéral De Croo 9 2. Le Covid-19 : les droits humains à 2. Biens et services 18 l’épreuve 10 2.1 Logement : miser sur la sensibilisation et les tests de situation 18 3. Des interventions policières qui 2.2 Banques et assurances 21 suscitent des inquiétudes 10 2.3 Mobilité 21 4. Extrémisme : de la haine à quelque 3. Enseignement 23 chose de pire 10 3.1 Formations sur l’enseignement inclusif 25 3.2 Recommandations sur le soutien aux élèves à besoins d’enseignement spécifiques dans 5. Et pourtant… 11 les mesures contre le Covid-19 en Flandre 26 3.3 Recommandations pour n'exclure aucun élève à l'heure du Covid-19 27 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Programmvorlage Deutsch
    Contents Speakers The final version of the Draft Common Frame of Mr Giuseppe Abbamonte, DG Justice, Freedom Reference (DCFR) was published in October 2009. At and Security, European Commission, Brussels p resent, the European Commission is carrying out a Professor Christian von Bar, European Legal ERA selection process to determine which parts of the Studies Institute, University of Osnabrück Academy of European Law academic DCFR will be included in the final CFR. As a follow-up to the ERA events organised in the Professor Hugh Beale, University of Warwick framework of the CoPECL Network, this conference will discuss content and perspectives of a future Professor Eric Clive, University of Edinburgh ‘political’ CFR. One of the main purposes of the CFR is to provide a set of principles, definitions and Professor Bénédicte Fauvarque-Cosson, University Panthéon-Assas, Paris model rules which could be used as a ‘toolbox’ for better European lawmaking. Mr Rafael Gil Nievas, Permanent Representation Substantive reforms in the consumer protection field of Spain to the EU, Brussels are currently on the agenda. The conference will ask EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW whether and how the development of the CFR and Professor Piotr Machnikowski, University of the ongoing revision of EU consumer law (e.g. Wrocław EU CONSUMER LAW Consumer Rights Directive, Package Travel Directive) REVISION AND THE CFR could be synchronised and connected. Dr Chantal Mak, University of Amsterdam TOWARDS AN OPTIONAL Furthermore, it will highlight whether the CFR can Professor
    [Show full text]
  • The Harmonisation of the Law of Personal Security
    Matthias E. Storme Professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Universiteit Antwerpen The Harmonisation of the Law of Personal Security In this paper in honour of Prof. Drobnig*1, I would like to deal with the following topics in relation to (the harmonisation of the law of) personal security: – The level of abstraction fi t for a European restatement on this matter (1) – The structuring of the different institutions in a conceptual and regulatory framework (2) – The relationship between the specifi c rules for personal security and general contract law in the proposed Draft Common Frame of Reference*2 (3) – The rules applicable to provision of proprietary security by a third party (4) 1. General problems of harmonisation The draft common frame of reference tends to formulate rules as much as possible on a general level, and this is clearly also true in the fi eld of personal security. As we will see, many questions are already dealt with in general terms in Book II, on contracts and juridical acts in general, or in Book III, on obligations in general. Further, within the fi eld of personal security, matters are regulated basically for two broad categories of personal security, dependent and independent personal security, with even a substantial general part for both of them. Is this tendency merely a revival of the Pandectist temptation, as some opponents have cried, reducing the Pandektenschule further unjustly to mere Begriffsjurisprudenz? There are some objective elements explain- ing and probably also justifying this style. I would like to mention four. All four were to some extent — and mutatis mutandis — also present in the context of 19th-century Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Stefan Graziadei University of Graz and University of Antwerp
    Six models for Reforming the Selection of Judges to the BiH Constitutional Court Stefan Graziadei University of Graz and University of Antwerp Working paper, No. 14 January 2016 Summary Following the decision on the unconstitutionality of the Day of the Republic (U-3/13) in late 2015, Bosnian Serbs and Croats vowed to terminate the mandate of international judges of the country’s constitutional court. If the Bosnian parliament failed to act, political leaders from the Bosnian Serb entity would call a referendum on the Court and drop out of state institutions. Against the backdrop of this political threat, Bosnians need to debate if they still need international judges or whether the Court’s composition should be reformed. Comparatively, the presence of international judges in national apex courts remains an exception. This paper will not enter the debate on whether it is time to call time on international judges, but will show how the composition of the Court could be reformed. Politicians could draw inspiration from several models discussed in the paper: the domestic model, the German model, the Belgian model, the ECtHR model, and the D’Hondt model. However, the possibility is not excluded that the very changes that Bosnian Serb politicians demand might require constitutional reform. About the author Stefan Graziadei has studied Political Science at the University of Padua, the UWE Bristol, the ULB Brussels and the University of California in San Diego. His academic interest focuses on comparative constitutional law, comparative politics, minority rights, the politics of divided societies, Europeanization and, in relation to that, post conflict state building in former Yugoslav societies.
    [Show full text]
  • Mors Codicis: End of the Age of Codification? Iain Stewart*
    Mors Codicis: End of the Age of Codification? Iain Stewart* INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 18 I. CODE AND CODIFICATION .................................................................. 18 A. Typology............................................................................. 18 B. The Name “Code” .............................................................. 20 II. THE CODE NAPOLÉON—FROM BOOK TO DATABASE ....................... 23 A. Comprehensiveness, from Constantinople to Berlin .......... 23 B. The French Codifiers .......................................................... 24 C. The Code civil from Book to Database .............................. 24 III. IS CODIFICATION STILL POSSIBLE? FROM SCROLLS TO SCROLLING ......................................................................................... 26 A. Life of the Code civil .......................................................... 26 B. Too Much Codification? ..................................................... 26 C. The French Codes Today .................................................... 28 D. Codes, from Books to Databases ........................................ 29 IV. JUSTINIAN: ACCESS, COMPREHENSIVENESS AND EXCLUSIVITY ...................................................................................... 30 A. Access—Physical and Intellectual ..................................... 30 B. Physical Access—Cost ....................................................... 31 C. Access and Democracy ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Addressee Name
    Council Decision CD 2013/9 of 20 December 2013 on ELI Projects In accordance with Article 12(3)(b) of the Statute, the Council appoints the members of the Advisory Committee on the project ‘Rescue of Business in Insolvency Law’ as proposed in the Annex and establishes a Members Consultative Committee. ANNEX As specified in the project proposal (approved in decision CD 2013/8), the Working Party is composed of the reporters, other members of the Project Team, the Advisory Committee, and the National Correspondents. The following persons, based on their expertise in one or more of the fields listed below, are suggested by the reporters, Stephan Madaus, Bob Wessels and Kristin van Zwieten as members of the Advisory Committee: I. Insolvency law practice Chris Laughton, partner at Mercer & Hole, UK; he has vast knowledge and experience of European recovery practices and insolvency regimes, including the European Insolvency Regulation. Alberto Núñez-Lagos, partner at Uría Menéndez, Spain; he specialises in restructuring; he has advised leading Spanish and international corporations on some of the most important insolvency cases in Spain in recent years, acting for debtors, creditors or management. Paul Oberhammer, professor of law, University of Vienna; of counsel in the Litigation/Controversy Department and a member of the International Arbitration Practice Group at WilmerHale; in 2012 he was commissioned with the review of the European Insolvency Regulation by the EU Commission. II. Contract law Onofrio Troiano (ELI Fellow), full professor of private law and European private law, University of Foggia, Italy. III. Company law Horst Eidenmüller (ELI Fellow), professor of law, Munich University, Germany; the focus of his work is on company and insolvency law and dispute resolution; member of an expert committee that advises the German Ministry of Justice on issues of company and insolvency law reform.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) Interim Outline Edition
    Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) Interim Outline Edition Prepared by the Study Group on a European Civil Code and the Research Group on EC Private Law (Acquis Group) Based in part on a revised version of the Principles of European Contract Law edited by Christian von Bar, Eric Clive and Hans Schulte-Nölke and Hugh Beale, Johnny Herre, Jérôme Huet, Peter Schlechtriem†, Matthias Storme, Stephen Swann, Paul Varul, Anna Veneziano and Fryderyk Zoll This work can be ordered as a book for J 9,90 at www.sellier.de (ISBN 978-3-86653-059-1). More texts by the Study Group and the Acquis Group are available at www.law-net.eu. www.law-net.eu www.sellier.de Table of contents Introduction 1 Academic contributors and funders 41 Table of Destinations 51 Table of Derivations 59 Model Rules 71 Book I General provisions 101 Book II Contracts and other juridical acts 105 Book III Obligations and corresponding rights 149 Book IV Specific contracts and the rights and obligations arising from them 191 Book V Benevolent intervention in another’s Affairs 299 Book VI Non-Contractual liability arising out of damage caused to another 303 Book VII Unjustified enrichment Annex 1 Definitions 321 Annex 2 Computation of time Index 331 www.law-net.eu www.sellier.de Introduction General ....................................................................... 3 1. DCFR and CFR distinguished ........................................... 3 2. An interim outline edition of the DCFR ............................... 4 3. The timing and nature of this edition .................................. 4 4. An academic, not a politically authorised text .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Jaarverslag 2020: Kwetsbare Mensenrechten in Crisistijden
    Jaarverslag 2020 Kwetsbare mensenrechten in crisistijden Voor gelijkheid, tegen discriminatie Jaarverslag 2020 Kwetsbare mensenrechten in crisistijden Voor gelijkheid, tegen discriminatie 2 Inhoud Voorwoord 4 12 Visie en missie 6 2 Gelijkheid bevorderen Samen werken aan gelijkheid in tijden van sociale afstand 13 1. Werk 14 1.1 Diversiteit op de arbeidsmarkt: onze aanbevelingen 14 Markante 1.2 Trainingen bij bedrijven, organisaties en 8 besturen 15 gebeurtenissen 1.3 eDiv: in enkele klikken naar een beter 1 diversiteitsbeleid 16 1. Regeringsvorming 9 1.4 Socio-economische Monitoring: een diploma is niet steeds garantie op succes 17 1.1 Noodregering-Wilmès 9 1.5 Samenwerking met sociale partners 18 1.2 Federale regering-De Croo 9 2. COVID-19: een test voor de mensenrechten 10 2. Goederen en diensten 18 2.1 Huisvesting: inzetten op sensibilisering en praktijktesten 18 3. Onrust over politieoptreden 10 2.2 Banken en verzekeringen 20 2.3 Mobiliteit 21 4. Extremisme: van haat naar erger 10 3. Onderwijs 23 5. En toch … 11 3.1 Trainingen rond inclusief onderwijs 24 3.2 Aanbevelingen rond de ondersteuning voor leerlingen met specifieke onderwijs- behoeften in het COVID-19-beleid in Vlaanderen 26 3.3 Aanbevelingen om niemand uit te sluiten in tijden van COVID-19 26 4. Politie: training en preventie 27 3 Naar gelijkheid 4 op elk niveau 55 Discriminatie, 1. Unia, een (inter)federale instelling 56 haatboodschappen 1.1 Interfederaal en onafhankelijk: een meerwaarde voor iedereen 56 en haatmisdrijven 29 1.2 Platform Mensenrechten 56 bestrijden 3 2. Unia, overal dichtbij in België 57 1. Racisme 31 2.1 Vlaanderen 57 1.1 Een kanteljaar voor raciale ongelijkheid? 31 2.2 Wallonië 59 1.2 Interministeriële Conferentie na reeks 2.3 Unia in de Duitstalige gemeenschap 59 haatmisdrijven en -reacties 33 2.4 Lokale besturen zetten volop in op 1.3 Oprichting Begeleidingscommissie Racisme 33 praktijktesten, Vlaamse en Waalse regeringen volgen 59 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Jan-Feb 2021.Pdf
    | Европейски институт по право | Evropský právní institut | Europäisches Rechtsinstitut | Ευρωπαϊκό Ινστιτούτο Δικαίου | Institut européen du droit | Eiropas Tiesību institūts | Európai Jogi Intézet | Europees Rechtsinstituut | Instituto Euro- peu de Direito | Európsky právny inštitút | Euroopan oikeusinstituutti | Instituto Europeo de Derecho | Europæisk Ret- sinstitut | Euroopa Õigusinstituut | Istituto Europeo di Diritto | Europos teisės institutas | L-Istitut Ewropew dwar id- Dritt | Europejski Instytut Prawa | Institutul EuropeanBringing de Legal Drept Experts| Evropski Together pravni inštitut | Europeiska rättsinstitutet | | Европейски институт по право | Evropský právní institut | Europäisches Rechtsinstitut | Ευρωπαϊκό Ινστιτούτο Δικαίου | Insti- tut européen du droit | Eiropas Tiesību institūts | Európai Jogi Intézet | Europees Rechtsinstituut | Instituto Europeu de Direito | Európsky právny inštitút | Euroopan oikeusinstituutti | Instituto Europeo de Derecho | Europæisk Retsinstitut | Euroopa Õi- gusinstituut | Istituto Europeo di Diritto | Europos teisės institutas | L-Istitut Ewropew dwar id-Dritt | Europejski Instytut Prawa | Institutul European de Drept | Evropski pravni inštitut | Europeiska rättsinstitutet | | Европейски институт по право | Evropský právní institut | Europäisches Rechtsinstitut | Ευρωπαϊκό Ινστιτούτο Δικαίου | Institut européen du droit | Eiropas Tiesību in- stitūts | Európai Jogi Intézet | Europees Rechtsinstituut | Instituto Europeu de Direito | Európsky právny inštitút | Euroopan oike- usinstituutti
    [Show full text]