Abstract The importance of secondary legislation in England and Wales cannot be understated. Its significance dwarfs the amount of political scrutiny which it receives. Secondary legislation can be subject to judicial review, but this may raise difficult constitutional issues. A potentially controversial ground of judicial review is that secondary legislation is contrary to the purposes of the enacting primary legislation. Examination of litigation regarding legal aid regulations shows how the courts’ view as to the purposes of such legislation can differ, revealing the essentially political choices which the courts have to make. There is however a way that will assist the courts in limiting such controversy if they find secondary legislation to be unlawful: they can order that the secondary legislation be quashed only from a future date, which would give Parliament or the executive time to address the legal defect identified. This encourages dialogue rather than conflict between the legal and executive branches of the constitution.

Abstract This article provides information regarding the assessment of bills, before the parliamentary procedure, in Greece, throughout the years. It focuses on the differences between the former ‘Central Legislative Committee’ and the current ‘Committee for Quality Evaluation of the Law Making Process’ and presents the responsibilities of the latter, as well as the improvements that have been achieved since its operation. Then an analysis of the quality of the legislation, in general, takes place and the relevant problems are highlighted.

Abstract Standard essential patents have become an extremely crucial element in developing modern technologies and standardization processes. This article examines the importance of standardization and standard essential patents in developing technologies and their effect on the legal jurisprudential environment. The introduction emphasizes the role of standardization in promoting the adoption of various essential technologies. Additionally, it focuses on the significance of standard essential patents that safeguard the technologies underlying such standards. The discussion delves into a particular legal case involving Unwired Planet’s licensing campaign for standard essential patents in the communication industry, emphasizing the judgments handed down by the UK Supreme Court. The analysis further investigates critical issues involved in the decision, such as jurisdiction over global licensing, non-discrimination under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms, and the flexibility of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory negotiations. The UK Supreme Court’s ruling clarifies maintaining a proper equilibrium between the interests of SEP holders and encouraging fair and reasonable licensing practices.

Abstract Data protection and competition law are perhaps two of the most enmeshed legal arenas in the contemporary data-driven world. This essay ingresses into this intersection, appraising the competitive implications of India’s Data Protection Bill, 2022 through key arenas of conflict such as jurisdictional tussles, data portability, the remedy of mandatory data sharing, and compliance costs. Although the intersection of privacy and competition law has been discussed in Indian scholarship, an analysis of the competitive implications of the Data Protection Bill has been absent. This is precisely the gap that this piece aims to fill, by appraising the host of new implications of the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill (DPDPB) on Indian competition and providing a framework to evaluate various competition concerns such as jurisdiction, compliance, and data sharing of any subsequent data protection bill in India. It does this by first analyzing the extent to which competitive concerns can be addressed in the Indian data protection system. With this premise, it secondly considers the question of jurisdictional primacy between the Competition Commission and the Data Protection Board, arguing for the primacy of the Competition Commission. Thirdly, it discusses the questions of data portability, mandatory data sharing and compliance costs in the DPDBP which could affect India’s competition, critically discussing the trade-offs and suggesting potential solutions. The goal of the piece is to critically examine the implications of the 2022 version of the bill to suggest ways forward for its future iterations in India.

Abstract The presented article considers the essence and content of the most common defect in legal science—“legal gaps”. This study presents various scientific approaches to the definition of legal gaps. Considering various scientific approaches, the authors of this study formulated their original version of this concept considering its absence from the theory of penitentiary law. The study analyses the main conceptual approaches to the problem of the progressiveness of law in the historical context. The main features of legal gaps are named to become able to distinguish them from conflicts of law. The authors outlined a set of features indicating the presence of a legislative gap in a particular case and provided a scientifically sound classification of gaps. The article also focused on the main types of legal gaps. In addition, the authors addressed the presence of legal gaps in Ukrainian legislation. The originality of this study lies in the formulation of new theoretical conclusions and generalizations that will help identify, eliminate, and overcome gaps in civil procedural law.

This is my final editorial and a fitting time for a brief retrospect over the 10 years of my tenure. From the first, I was conscious that it is an immense privilege to be entrusted with the development and continuity of a journal dedicated to a core aspect of the rule of law. I have tried to justify OUP’s trust by developing the Review along lines that support the rule of law and provide useful opportunities for the widest range of authors possible to contribute to that theme. In the course of an exciting journey of expansion, we have published the first dual-language issue of the Review and thereby made a significant contribution to a phase of Welsh devolution; we have had the privilege of hosting a number of special issues on a range of issues; we have re-established the privilege of publishing the annual Renton lecture; we have enormously expanded the range of jurisdictions providing contributions; and perhaps most importantly we have successfully attracted contributions from a strikingly wide range of authors from undergraduates to emeritus professors, encouraging anyone who feels they have something important to say about the legislative function to see the Review as a natural repository for their views.

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed myriad brain-wracking questions to decision-makers at all levels. Viet Nam managed to curb mortality and morbidity to praiseworthy levels in the past COVID-19 waves, however, has now had its back against the wall amidst the recent exponential infection cases and draining medical resources. For swiftly flattening the curve, the legislature authorized the Government to take bolder steps where needed, even different from the laws. This article argues that while the empowerment comes from the goodwill of the legislature for the purpose of containing the raging outbreak, there remain procedural irregularities. This should garner more attention from the state authority to ensure the rule of law and legality of all state actions during the time of public health emergency.

Abstract In the Cayman Islands, a British Overseas Territory, the proper understanding of the plain meaning rule (or literal rule) of statutory interpretation remains unclear. In its most basic iteration, the rule states that, where a statute is clear and unambiguous, the words must be given their natural and ordinary signification; there is no room for interpretation. That notwithstanding, to this day, even the meaning of the rule, as opposed to its application, still sometimes sparks debate in the Commonwealth. In 2015, a judge of the Grand Court in Cayman held that once a provision in a statute is clear and unambiguous, a court does not need to read the provision in its broader context. In a subsequent case, in 2018, a court of coordinate jurisdiction disagreed. It ruled that, even where a provision appears to be clear and unambiguous, a court must still read the statute in its fuller context in order to decipher the legal meaning in that particular context. This article discusses the plain meaning rule with a view to elucidating its proper understanding while questioning the appropriateness of its continuing nomenclature especially in light of developments in recent decades.

The UK Government has published a draft Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (Repeal) Bill (‘the Draft Bill’),1 which is presently being given pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament.2 At the heart of the Draft Bill lies an enigma, which highlights the peculiarity of a Royal prerogative that continues to exist subject to statute, but which is not of itself a creature of statute. In a country without a written constitution, Sovereign power is not a creation of the legislature, although in time, it has come tacitly to be exercised by the tolerance of, and subject to the will of, Parliament. For the first time, the Draft Bill raises a question that is both of extreme theoretical interest and of potential practical importance for the future development of constitutional law and theory in the United Kingdom: if Parliament once invades an area of the prerogative—which...

Abstract Modern aspirations of Ukraine for European integration, the impact of globalization, and innovative technologies are the driving force on the path of reforming the national legal system. In this regard, issues concerning the modernization of the civil liability have recently become of significant importance. This article is aimed at analysing modernization of Ukrainian civil liability and forecasting tendencies of further reform of the civil liability institution in Ukraine. The methodological basis of the article includes the comparative law method, normative-dogmatic method, method of terminological analysis, method of operationalization of concepts, classification method, methods of analysis and synthesis, statistical method, legal modelling method, and complex method. In the course of the research-leading scientific and legal approaches to civil liability were analysed, and the most typical approaches were unified. A conditional list of the leading directions of modernization of legal regulation of the civil liability institution is proposed. The relevance of the subject matter is amplified by the fact that at present the scope of the most important and reforming issues of civil liability is expanding and remains either understudied or entirely disregarded by the representatives of academia and legislators.