Law

angelegten
Gemeinschaft von Mann und Frau ist fester
Bestandteil der christlichen abendländischen Kultur.
Nach kanonischem Eherecht kann eine Ehe nur durch
den Tod eines der Ehegatten aufgelöst werden. Diese
Vorstellung prägt auch die rechtliche Ausgestaltung
der Ehe in den Rechtsordnungen abendländischer Provenienz.
Vor allem in den katholisch ausgerichteten
Staaten Südeuropas und Lateinamerikas war die staatliche
Ehe lange Zeit regelmäßig als unscheidbar ausgestaltet.
In den stark protestantisch orientierten Staaten
wird die Ehe zumindest als eine Gemeinschaft
verstanden, die auf Lebenszeit ausgerichtet ist. Dementsprechend
wird auch in Deutschland die in Art. 6
GG geschützte Ehe bis heute als grundsätzlich unauflösbar
angesehen.
In den letzten Jahrzehnten haben sich jedoch die Eherechte
der abendländisch geprägten Rechtsordnungen
stark von ihren religiösen Wurzeln emanzipiert.

Family enterprises make up the majority of all businesses across Western Europe. Nonetheless, they are seen as an endangered species. Succession is an especially critical moment for their survival. The succession process is shaped by the dynamics of generational relations in the family. Different institutional contexts between countries create diverse conditions for the negotiation between the generations.

Doing Succession in Europe examines whether and how succession processes in European family businesses vary. Scholars of the family, capitalism, welfare state and law discuss comparative findings and ideas; business and legal experts highlight the concrete practices.

Since the declaration of Helsinki in 1964, data protection in a medical research environment has been a matter of concern. The implementation of a 1995 directive of the European Union (95/46/EC), has created a scattered array of differing national legislations within Europe. Some countries even have different regional laws on data protection, making it even harder for cross-border data transfer for research. Therefore, the EU commission issued in 2012 a proposal for a regulation on the protection of individuals with regards to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. One single European legislative text would do away with fragmentation caused by the diverging implementations of the current Directive in the Member States. It would apply across the EU and leave no room for individual, national regulations in this field. It could be a great opportunity, making it easier for cross-border research projects across Europe: Having a single point of contact, equally binding laws across Europe, clear definitions of consent and whether consent or the use of anonymised data is required, will certainly be very helpful.

However, the proposal has received criticism by the research community as it implies certain changes (Taupitz, MedR (2012)30:423-428).

Researchers claim that amendments are needed to clarify the scope of the Regulation and ensure that the use of pseudonymised data in health research is regulated proportionately (Association of Medical research charities: http://www.amrc.org.uk/news-policy--debate_consultation-responses_external-consultations-by-year#2012, last-opened-on 09Sep2012). For example, the requirement of informed consent is strengthened. Under certain conditions, research can’t be done without the data subject giving explicit, precise consent. For large European research projects, it could cause great obstacles.
We examine the implications of the draft regulation for large research projects with a focus on biomedical research, showing the approach of two current EU projects (www.biomedbridges.eu and www.ehr4cr.eu).

Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research: The EHR4CR Project

Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) is one of the most innovative clinical research projects in the world. Launched within the Innovative Medicine Initiative, the largest public-private partnership in Europe, initiated by the European Commission and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, it is run by a consortium of 35 partners, including 11 university hospitals and 11 pharmaceutical companies together with renowned research institutions and small IT companies from 7 European countries. The objective of the project is to create an exchange platform and business model for using data from electronic health records to test the feasibility of clinical study protocols, recruit patients into studies and integrate the collection and reporting of research data within the healthcare workflow. Join what’s sure to be a lively discussion on this intriguing project, the privacy issues introduced by it and the solutions put forward.

Roland Krause, TMF e.V., Berlin
Pierre-Yves Lastic, R&D Data Privacy Officer, Sanofi

What you’ll take away:

An overview of the project from a member of the EHR4CR Executive Committee and Ethics Board
The privacy issues faced by the project and the solutions used to resolve them from the leader of the EHR4CR Privacy and Security Group

This comparative law paper focuses on sports arbitration and compares three sets of rules: German national DIS Sport Arbitration Rules1, internal procedural rules by National Federations like Deutscher Fußballbund2 and international CAS arbitral proceedings. Although quite similar, the procedural approach varies due to a different legal tradition3. For example, DIS does not provide for a consultation while the CAS rules do.
Germany was a latecomer to the international arbitration scene4, largely due to an outdated arbitration law and the lack of an internationally recognised arbitration institution5. As of 1 January 2008 the German Institution of Arbitration has established the German Court of Arbitration for Sport6. By contrasting the jurisdiction of each institution and thus delimiting the field of jurisdiction of the German Court and the CAS, comparative charts and graphics point out the areas in which exclusive jurisdiction of one of theses institutions exists.
Various reasons may lead to international sports federations being prevented from enforcing their sanctions on an equal basis. External sport governance and internal political pressure may lead a national federation to either facing international sporting exclusion or internally the discontinuation of state funding7, or the state accreditation/support/recognition of its policies, not to mention judicial sanctions in case of contempt of a national court’s decision.
Concluding remarks from a judge’s viewpoint outline the reasons behind the recent changes and give recommendations for future changes of the arbitral proceeding rules in Germany. Reasons include the need for faster proceedings, higher arbitration fees, electronic court files, clearer wording and transparency of the proceedings8, more opportunities for involvement for young colleagues9, and more chances for support and recognition within political circles10.
1 www.dis-arb.de/sport
2 http://www.dfb.de/index.php?id=504064
3 DFB has created its own “homegrown” rules , others (www.vdst.de) copy the Civil Procedure Code
or refer to Criminal procedure law.
4 Until recently, German law excluded recourse to arbitration, a point that states should take into consideration when implementing arbitration clauses in favour of a specific arbitral institution.
5 The European & Middle Eastern Arbitration Review 2009,
http://www.globalarbitrationreview.com/reviews/14/sections/54/chapters/521/germany/
6 Mertens, SpuRt 2008, 180
7 The German horseriding federation being dissolved and thus prevented from national funding:
www.tagesspiegel.de/sport/deutscher-reitsport-nicht-mehr-fest-im-sattel/1532284.html
8 For online publication of rulings, cf.Vieweg, SpuRT 2009, 192
9 Those interested who are sport- as well as ADR-lovers and not necessarily legal scholars.
10 Especially in doping cases, the aim of politicians for “clean games“ is rising.