International Review of Law - الأعداد السابقة

This paper seeks to argue that mediation has been hitherto conceived in the construction industry, and indeed by practitioners in other related disciplines such as property management, as largely a “problem-solving” mechanism. Whilst this is clearly an aim of mediation there is also the appended danger that the value of mediation is conceived in these terms alone. If this is the case, then its value, or success, is conceived very narrowly. The aim of this paper is, then, to argue that there are wider values to mediation in a construction setting. These values can be considered as a “family” of related attitudes, skills and perceptions that can positively affect the persons involved. By affecting growth in individuals an organisational change may follow. This, in turn, can result in a significant cultural change in the industry, and associated professions as a whole, as well as having a positive impact on construction education. The paper begins by an overview of the development of mediation and proceeds to consider its current use of mediation in construction. It then considers the question of how mediation success is conceived. The paper argues that both the current practice of construction mediation and the way in which its success is measured are too narrow. It argues that a wider approach to construction mediation is required. Finally, drawing from the literature on “idealist” mediation an account of mediation as a developmental process is developed.

This work analyses the reforms carried out in some of the Muslim states regarding the issue of triple divorce in one session. According to a majority of Sunni jurists, pronouncing the word “talaq” three times in succession, equates with three “talaqs.” On the contrary, according to Ibn Taimiyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and the Shi‘a Imamiyah, three pronouncements of the word talaq in one session equals only one talaq. Most Arab, as well as many Muslim states such as Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Sudan, Morocco, Kuwait, Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, have, while formulating their own laws, followed Ibn Taimiyah's and Ibn al-Qayyim's positions on this issue. In this regard, Sri Lanka's Marriage and Divorce (Muslim) Act, 1951, as amended up to 2006, seems to be the most ideal legislation on triple talaq. In Pakistan, the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961, has abolished triple talaq, as the procedure laid down in section 7 is largely applicable to one or two pronouncements only and excludes three pronouncements. Furthermore, some portions of section 7 are in clear contravention of the dictates of Islamic law, which adds to this precarious section's peculiarity. The superior courts in Pakistan and Bangladesh have not been consistent in interpreting the law on this important subject, while on the other hand, some Indian High Courts have treated triple talaq as invalid.

On September 30, 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered the government of Canada to continue to exempt Vancouver's supervised narcotic injection facility from Canada's criminal drug laws. The controversial clinic, known as Insite, had operated for eight years in one of the country's most socially troubled and economically challenged neighbourhoods struggling with addictions to illegal drugs. Insite was the first of its kind in North America, although supervised drug injection facilities continue in Europe and Australia. In this article we describe what the court accepted as the factual outcomes of this clinic and the constitutional basis for this judicial rejection of government health and criminal policy. We also consider the implications of this decision for similar facilities across Canada.

The law No. 6 of 2008 regarding transferring Kuwait Airways to a public company and the law No. 37 of 2010 regarding the regulation of programs and operations of privatization, have defined the procedures for privatizing public enterprises, i.e., the accrual of assets and liabilities from a public enterprise to a shareholding company so that the latter replaces the public enterprise with regard to fulfilling its objectives, rights and commitments. The objective of this work is to study the legal characterization for the accrual of assets and liabilities and to evaluate the results that have emanated from such characterization in order to determine the proposed theory that avoids any negative consequences.

The exercise of prosecutorial discretion is a unique executive act that continues to be very well-protected from public scrutiny in many jurisdictions throughout the world. In this article, I attempt to survey virtually the entire body of case law on the limits of prosecutorial discretion in Singapore. Probably because prosecutorial discretion is protected by the Constitution, it took a while for the Singapore courts to retreat from their initial characterisation of the discretion as absolute and outside the scope of any form of review. Against a wider backdrop of increasing rights-consciousness (especially within the courts) and the public demand for transparency and accountability, the legal position has evolved to its current and more legally defensible form, viz, prosecutorial discretion is not absolute, and can be subject to, inter alia, constitutional challenge. It may well be a while before this position evolves again, but the natural progression from this, as seen in other jurisdictions, is the public release of general guidelines for prosecution. While such a progression brings about certain benefits, it is not without its challenges and may be motivated (though not exclusively) by extra-legal considerations such as politics and populism. Ultimately, only the state and its people can decide on the conception of the rule of law that it subscribes to, and it is with humble hope that this article may be used as a reference point when future issues pertaining to prosecutorial discretion are considered.