Field trip Belfast

Visited Queen’s University and Belfast city, am really grateful for the kind staff and the kindness of local people. I had to notice it really is a beautyful and vibrant city.

Joshua Rozenberg: Never mind human rights law, EU law is much more powerful

“Even though the human rights court in Strasbourg and the convention it enforces are never far from the headlines these days, it is rare to find any mention of another important human rights agreement – the European Union’s charter of fundamental rights. This is understandable: although the charter was “proclaimed” by the EU institutions more than 13 years ago, it did not become legally binding until the Lisbon treaty took effect in December 2009. Even then, the charter applies only to EU member states when they are implementing EU law. That’s stressed in a discussion paper just published by the European Commission ahead of a major conference on EU justice policy next month (at which I have been invited by the commission to make a short introductory speech)…

…The ruling demonstrates once again that EU law trumps laws passed by parliament. Despite all the attention paid to human rights law, EU law is much more powerful. And it’s a decision that may make life more difficult for ministers. The foreign office will have to tell embassies in London that they can’t sack their domestic staff without paying the compensation to which those staff are entitled under EU law. But what’s wrong with that?”

You can reach the article here or by clicking on the image above.

LSE Study on the effect of immigration on the London economicy

The study can be reached here or by clickin on the picture below.

Me and my students attended a meeting with Henri Malosse, president of the European Economic and Social Committee

You can find a short summary of the program on the website of EESC.

For my students – Heather Garretson & Bradley Charles: “Because I Said So” Is a Reason — But Not a Reasoning Technique

I read an exremely interesting paper about legal reasoning, it was a really nice little overview of reasoning techniques, you find the article in The Law Teacher here, on page 20. It says, the  nine reasoning techniques are the following (I cut them out of the article):

Apply the Rule’s Plain Language
• Apply the rule’s language by repeating a word or phrase, using a synonym or antonym, and characterizing facts.

Imply
• Apply law by comparing factual causes and effects to the rule.
• Apply law by comparing implications of a rule’s interpretation to the rule.

Infer
• Infer from facts to satisfy the rule.
• Infer to interpret codified law.

Clarify
• Clarify law, facts, and issues to reason.

Hypothesize
• Hypothesize a fictional situation where the issue and conclusion are clear. Reason by comparing the fictional situation to the case at hand.

Characterize Law
• Characterize law to explain whether a rule is easy or difficult to satisfy.

Analogize
• Analogize by comparing and contrasting precedent and statutes.

Quantify
• Quantify chance of success.
• Quantify facts to prove the rule with adjectives, adverbs, and numbers.

Evaluate Opposing Arguments
• Evaluate factual and legal weaknesses in opposing arguments.