Explore the vast range of titles available.

This article argues that the purpose of the English gateways for service out of the jurisdiction is to identify a presumptive meaningful connection; that courts have used different mechanisms to rebut the presumption of a meaningful connection established by the gateways; and that there are lessons to be learnt from a clearer, more explicit understanding of this presumptive purpose of the gateways. The article uses Brownlie (I and II) and Fong v Ascentic Ltd to support and illustrate these arguments.

A practical guide to recovering stolen assets and combating corruption. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of non-conviction based asset forfeiture, a powerful tool for recovering the proceeds of corruption, especially when assets are transferred abroad. It is designed for policy makers, legislators, prosecutors, investigators, and judges in countries considering or implementing these regimes. This guide identifies key concepts, legal frameworks, and best practices for effective asset recovery. It explores international treaties, asset tracing, and forfeiture procedures. Case studies and examples from various jurisdictions illustrate practical applications. It offers guidance on international cooperation, asset management, and balancing due process with effective enforcement. * Understand legal frameworks for asset forfeiture * Implement effective asset tracing and seizure strategies * Navigate international cooperation in asset recovery * Combat corruption and financial crime

The concept of procedural justice has been promoted as a potential solution in the contest for resources involving indigenous peoples and others. It seeks the formulation of processes that are fair and just both to indigenous peoples and to the other parties affected. Using a comparative approach, this paper analyses processes and mechanisms adopted in some selected common law jurisdictions against the ideal of procedural justice. It seeks to consider mechanisms which conform to the principle of procedural justice to address the issue of indigenous peoples' rights to land and resources in Malaysia. The principle is relevant in Malaysian common law which also subjects matters affecting fundamental liberties to procedural justice. Comparative perspectives provide models for practical applications of indigenous peoples' rights. They assist policy analysis through learning from the successes and failures of other jurisdictions in improving legal reform.

It is estimated that the proceeds of crime, corruption and tax evasion represent between $1 trillion and $1.6 trillion per year, with half coming from developing countries. Proceeds are typically transferred abroad and hidden in foreign jurisdictions, thus requiring international cooperation. Various international conventions and agreements require international cooperation on this issue, in particular the United Nations Convention against Corruption; however, only $5 billion in stolen assets have been repatriated over the last 15 years. This enormous gap reveals that significant barriers continue to impede asset recovery despite the commitments taken by governments, civil society and the private sector. Drawing on the experience of practitioners with hands-on experience, the Stolen Asset Recovery (StAR) Initiative launched this study to identify the barriers to stolen asset recovery internationally, provide brief analysis of the impact of these barriers, and propose recommendations for overcoming these obstacles. This volume is intended to guide policy makers in their efforts to ensure necessary resources and the development of a plan, policy or strategy aimed at eradicating the barriers to asset recovery. In addition, this study proposes actions to be taken by the G20, international organizations, financial institutions, developmental agencies and civil society.

The main stated purposes of these changes are to improve the assessment standards operating at the vocational stage, enhance access into the vocational stage and improve the flexibility of the delivery of it and to increase the diversity of the profession.2 Similar goals have been espoused for barristers' vocational training in England and Wales, but the changes, which contemplate a greater variety in vocational training pathways, have not extended so far as to remove the need for any form of the vocational stage.3 In August 2014, the American Bar Association (ABA) mandated that US students graduating in Spring 2019 from ABA-approved law schools are required to have completed a designated period of experiential skills-based learning within their law degree.4 In Hong Kong, the Standing Committee on Legal Education and Training has recently released both a Draft Report (the Draft Report)5 and a Final Report (the Final Report)6 as a part of a comprehensive review of legal education and training, a major part of which is dedicated to the future of its PLT.7 This article analyses the current diverging directions taken between England and Wales and the United States relating to PLT, and the position taken in the Draft Report and Final Report. Vocational Training in England and Wales for Solicitors and Barristers Following on from the Ormrod Report,8 entry into the traditional professions of solicitors and barristers in England and Wales has normally been predicated on completion of three separate and consecutive stages, being the academic, vocational and work-based training requirements, although provision exists for suitably qualified exceptions.9 The vocational stage places an emphasis on acquiring skills rather than substantive law, a shift in teaching which took place in the 1980s and 1990s in the then Bar Vocational Course (now called the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC)) and the Legal Practice Course (LPC) in that order.10 While that system remained basically intact, there were some significant modifications to it in ensuing years promoting flexibility, foremost among which were: (1) The entitlement to offer LPCs with an online component.11 (2) Provision of tailor-made LPCs.12 (3) Permission to take the LPC and the academic stage jointly.13 (4) Some centralisation of assessment in the BPTC.14 (5) A requirement that applicants to the BPTC successfully complete an aptitude test.15 A distinguishing feature of training and education in England was the creation of a regulatory objective in the Legal Services Act 2007 to encourage a \"diverse\" legal profession.16 The overall regulator of training and education of the legal profession, the Legal Services Board (LSB), issued statutory guidance on this area, requiring that legal education and training concentrate on outcomes rather than processes and that it should be flexible, balanced both in relation to the expectation of standards at authorisation and concerning obligations between entities and individuals and devoid of unnecessary restrictions to entry.17 This has had a significant impact on the findings of consultations and reports in this area which have appeared in recent years and are discussed below. \"23 A number of criticisms were levelled in the LETR Report at the LPC including that: (1) Its broadly generalist curriculum lacked utility m an increasingly specialised legal profession.24 (2) There was inconsistency of standards of assessment among LPC providers.25 (3) There was a lack of flexibility in its delivery.26 (4) The cost of the LPC was high which hindered access to it.27 The LETR Report warned about overreaction to the criticism of the BPTC mentioned above that it was not fit for purpose, as this might have related to dissatisfaction with the earlier incarnation of training barristers (the Bar Vocational Course) which had less active engagement with the Bar.28 It also noted that respondents were generally of the view that the BPTC was successful in its role in advocacy training.29 More negative perceptions of the BPTC, were deficiencies in the provision of the centralised examination system in the BPTC,30 shortages of pupillages for many BPTC graduates,31 the potential impact of its aptitude testing in restricting diversity in the BPTC32 and the prohibitive costs of the BPTC and access to it.33 While the LETR Report did not advocate abandoning the current system of formalised vocational training for solicitors and barristers, it did seek reform in a number of areas. [...]in relation to the training of solicitors, it advocated the development of greater flexibility in the delivery of existing systems to promote greater specialisation,34 as well as allowing alternative pathways reducing costs, including consideration of a system of legal apprenticeships as direct entry points into that arm of the profession.35 The LETR Report also expressed the view that access and cost improvements for the vocational component for both barristers and solicitors could be obtained through greater integration between the workplace and vocational learning, provision of joint academic and vocational degrees and consideration of \"price, scholarships and financial assistance\" as a factor in licencing.36 In order to ensure consistency of standards, the LETR Report also saw it as essential that thorough learning outcomes were prescribed and performance standards were utilised to accurately determine that those joining the profession had acquired all necessary skills.37 Following on from this, the LETR Report considered that centralised assessment could ensure standardisation of assessment.

Corruption and thefts of public assets harm a diffuse set of victims, weakens confidence in public institutions, damages the private investment climate, and threatens the foundations of the society as a whole. In developing countries with scarce public resources, the cost of corruption is an impediment to development: developing countries lose between US

The guide is organized into three major parts: Part A first provides an overview of the problem of stolen assets and the problem of recovering the assets once they are transferred abroad. Second, it describes how the international community has taken steps to respond to the problem through United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the Stolen Asset Recovery (StAR) Initiative. UNCAC introduced a new framework to facilitate the tracing, freezing, seizing, forfeiture, and return of assets stolen through corrupt practices and hidden in foreign jurisdictions. The StAR Initiative developed an action plan to support the domestication and implementation of asset recovery provisions under UNCAC, to facilitate countries' efforts to recover stolen assets that have been hidden in foreign jurisdictions, and ultimately, to help deter such flows and eliminate safe havens for hiding corruption proceeds. Third and finally, Part A introduces non-conviction based (NCB) asset forfeiture as one of the critical tools to combat corruption, describing the situations when it is useful, how it differs from criminal forfeiture, its usefulness in civil and common law jurisdictions, and the support it has gained internationally. Part B contains the 36 key concepts. The concepts have been grouped together by topic area, including prime imperatives, definitions of assets and offenses subject to NCB asset forfeiture, measures for investigation and preservation of assets, procedural and evidentiary concepts, determining parties and ensuring proper notice, judgment proceedings, organizational considerations and asset management, and international cooperation and asset recovery. The concepts are illustrated through examples from cases and excerpts from different jurisdictions' NCB asset forfeiture legislation. Part C contains a number of special contributions written by individual practitioners. The contributions focus on the general practice of NCB asset forfeiture and international cooperation in specific jurisdictions, namely Colombia, Guernsey, Ireland, Kuwait, Switzerland, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. In addition, some contributions illustrate a selection of NCB asset forfeiture practices, such as asset management, delegating certain roles to the executive branch, and pursuing forfeiture based on illicit enrichment. Le vol d’avoirs publics est un problème de développement de grande ampleur. On estime que le flux transfrontalier total provenant des activités criminelles, de la corruption et de la fraude fiscale, représente entre 1 et 1.6 trillion de dollars par an. Les dommages résultant de ces vols comprennent également la dégradation et la défiance envers les institutions publiques, l’affaiblissement du climat de confiance des investisseurs privés et la corruption des services sociaux en charges des programmes d’assistance de santé et d’éducation. Qu’ils soient publics ou privés, une fois transférés à l’étranger, ces fonds volés sont difficilement récupérables. Les pays en voie de développement se heurtent à de sérieux obstacles, liés à l’absence de lois sur la confiscation d’avoirs sans condamnation (CSC), de moyens d’investigations, de pouvoir judiciaire et de ressources financières inadéquates. La CSC est un outil primordial pour la restitution du produit et des moyens de la corruption. C’est un mécanisme juridique prévoyant la contrainte, la saisie et la confiscation d’avoirs volés, sans la nécessité d’une condamnation pénale. Un nombre croissant de systèmes législatifs nationaux ont institué des règles encadrant la CSC, et de tels cadres juridiques ont été recommandés par nombre d’organisations tant au niveau national que multilatéral. Cet intérêt croissant pour les lois sur la CSC rend nécessaire la mise au point d’un outil pratique pour les systèmes judiciaires envisageant de développer une telle réglementation. Ce livre est conçu comme un outil pratique pour aider les États à récupérer leurs avoirs volés. C’est le premier guide traitant de la confiscation de biens selon le principe des lois sans condamnation CSC et la première publication de synthèse dans le cadre de « l’Initiative pour la Restitution d’Avoirs Volés (StAR) ». Le guide identifie 36 concepts clés (légaux et opérationnels) que des lois sur la CSC devraient englober afin d’être efficaces dans la Restitution d’avoirs volés.

A court will not entertain an application for judicial review of legislation where the applicant does not disclose his/her right, interest or legitimate expectation on the subject matter of the complaint. This requirement of public adjudication is a vital component of the principle of justiciability. Originally developed as a principle of administrative law, this requirement has been imported into constitutional adjudication by the courts through their interpretation of the provisions of the constitution. This is the case in the United States, Australia, Nigeria and Zimbabwe where the law of standing remains in the traditionalist domain. Although the common law of standing has witnessed flashes of judicial activism in recent years owing to the sporadic judicial broadening of its base, it is the Canadian courts that have developed a systematic approach to the subject. They have developed four identifiable and guiding rules whereby citizens genuinely desirous of challenging the constitutionality of legislation, are granted standing in the discretion of the courts. The litigant can approach the courts in his/her own capacity, in the public interest or, where the party was brought to court on a criminal charge or civil suit, in defence of such charge or claim. This paper critically analyses the foregoing developments.

Corruption and thefts of public assets harm a diffuse set of victims, weakens confidence in public institutions, damages the private investment climate, and threatens the foundations of the society as a whole. In developing countries with scarce public resources, the cost of corruption is an impediment to development: developing countries lose between US$20 to US$40 billion each year through bribery, misappropriation of funds, and other corrupt practices. Corruption is by no means a \"victimless crime.\" This study aims to explore the standing of States and Government entities as victims and the possible recourse to private actions to redress public wrongs. States and Government entities may act as private litigants and bring civil suits to recover assets lost to corruption. The goal of this work is to promote knowledge and understanding as well as to increase the use of civil remedies and private lawsuits to recover stolen assets in the context of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) offences. The UNCAC, the global standard for the fight against corruption, does not contain a legal definition of corruption itself but lists an array of offences, including public and private sector bribery and the embezzlement of public and private sector funds. The study will mainly focus on these two types of corruption, namely bribery and embezzlement of funds. This study is not intended in any way to minimize the importance of criminal proceedings and confiscation in addressing acts of corruption. Rather, it will show that civil law remedies can effectively complement criminal penalties by attacking the economic base of corrupt activities both in the public and the private sectors. In fact, given the magnitude of the challenges, all avenues of asset recovery, be they criminal or civil, should be explored simultaneously in order to tackle corruption from each and every angle and achieve the goals of deterrence and enforcement. Hence, while criminal law expresses society's disapproval of the corrupt acts and aims at dissuasion, punishment, and confiscation of illicit proceeds, civil law focuses on victims' interests and aims at compensation and restitution. These procedures may occur sometimes in parallel, sometimes sequentially. An effective response to corruption very often requires concomitant use of both criminal and civil law remedies to achieve the desired result.

This chapter concerns with the manner in which eyewitness identification evidence is dealt with by the criminal justice system, and examines the way in which images of offenders are used to generate identification evidence. On one hand, it shows a sharp contrast between long‐standing judicial acknowledgement of the fallibility of eyewitness identification, and on the other, a general inattentiveness to the problems associated with the use of images of offenders. The chapter also considers the adequacy of the law generally, using the law in various jurisdictions as exemplars. It deals with uncertainty in fact‐finding and the distorting effects of adversarial criminal process, and discusses the forensic shortcomings of the criminal trial. These provide the general background to the discussion of the way in which the legal system deals with eyewitness identification evidence and identification of persons depicted in images that is undertaken in the chapter.