The legis actio sacramento in rem belongs to the most debated issues of specialised literature on Roman Law up to the present day. The literature on the subject would fill a whole library, only its approximative treatment would require a separate monography. When explaining the origins of the legis actio sacramento in rem one can distinguish several, more or less clearly isolated trends. The present study will regard the theory of oath and the theory of personal fight as the two most important. The fundamentally sacred character of the legis actio sacramento is emphasised by the theory of oath, according to which the principal aim of communal control could be the expiatio of the divinity retaliating the perjury, the sacramentum of the defeated party. This theory is also corroborated by the text of the vindicatio, appearing as the strictly formalised, religious-magical carmen. Although it is much older, the theory of personal fight is traced back to Jhering, and its essence is that in the beginning the parties actually fought against each other for the thing constituting the object of their controversy, but the community (the state), in order to preserve internal peace, brought the fight under its own control. Therefore, the fight, in the form of the legis actio sacramento in rem, as it is known today was enacted only symbolically, by employing the rod (festuca) instead of the spear (hasta). The aim of the present study is merely to highlight a possibility-based mainly on the primary sources and partly on the findings of the literature on the subject-which will not consider the motifs of sacrality and private fight contradictory in the structure of the legis actio sacramento in rem but will mingle them as organically complementing components.
This article aims to reconsider the controversial issue of the lawfulness of unauthorised humanitarian intervention. After providing a definition of humanitarian intervention and outlining its legality under contemporary international law, it examines the most common arguments raised in the literature for the purpose of justifying unilateral humanitarian intervention. The analysis covers such topics as the powers of the UN General Assembly to pass resolutions on the use of force, the theories on implicit or ex post facto authorisations by the Security Council, the text of the UN Charter, customary international law, as well as an alleged conflict of peremptory norms of international law.
Doping has been an issue for the greater part of a century. Current anti-doping policies involve punishment and chemical testing aimed at a single individual. Doping scandals show that it is rarely the fault of only an individual athlete, particularly in a team scenario. Coaches, sports scientist and other athletes may all contribute to an athlete’s decision to dope. A novel solution has been formulated, a ‘pool of responsibility’; the idea that responsibility for doping is borne by all team-members not just the individual athlete. Case studies and examples from organisational and legal literature were used to justify the concept.
The present study undertakes the review of one of the essential authorities of the Hungarian Constitutional Court: the issue of abstract subsequent norm control, which is currently amongst the most significant questions. The possibility of the constitutional review of the Supreme Court's directives on unifying the case law is subject to debate in legal literature and in the intercourse between the two organs as well. This study intends to elicit the nature of the problem through the elaboration of relating regulation and by utilizing certain Constitutional Court decisions concerning the subject. It will arrive at the conclusion that the present regulation also gives scope to the Constitutional Court review of directives on unifying the case law. The paper gives a survend evaluation of the solutions involved in the draft of the new Constitutional Court Act too.
The literature dealing with the life of Bódog Somló (1873–1920), one of the most outstanding authors of jurisprudence in Hungary in the last century, does not pay special attention to his study-tour in Germany. Somló spent the fall semester of academic year 1896/97 at the faculty of humanities of the Leipzig University, while the spring semester int the law school at the Heidelberg University. Somló’s peregrinatio academica, which is equally remarkable for both historical and cultural aspects, can be reconstructed on the basis of his correspodence. He was influenced by the lectures and seminars of K. G. Lamprecht and W. Wundt in Leipzig, and later by O. Karlowa and E. E. Bekker in Heidelberg. Because of the preparations of his acceptance as a lecturer in 1899 at the University of Cluj, the grand tour in Germany had a great importance in Somló’s life.
This essay discusses Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago from the aspect of “law and literature”. As a starting point, it argues that its “legal” reading is of a high relevance, since it helps us to better understand both the reality of Soviet law and the achievements of our legal systems. In order to illustrate this, it examines various legal layers embedded in the work: legal history, sociology of the punishment, criminal investigation, organizational sociology and psychology, and legal theory. In addition, the essay also focuses on the role of Western Law as a contrast in Solzhenitsyn’s work, and analyzes its metaphorical language about law. To conclude, it argues that this book could caution lawyers of the consequences of a politically-oriented approach to law that disregards the fundamental values of Western law.