Teisės apžvalga / Law Review 2010, nr. 1(6)

Permanent URI for this collection


Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 6
  • Publication
    Globalizacijos įtaka dėstymo metodams VDU teisės fakultete
    [Teaching techniques of law at VMU: impact of globalization]
    research article
    Teisės apžvalga = Law review [elektroninis išteklius]. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla, 2010, nr. 1(6), p. 4-15
    The idea to present a paper about teaching methods in legal profession arose after taking part in the conference of International Association of Law Schools of the World that took place in Montreal last May. The conference focused on the questions of globalization in law studies as well as the newest trends in comparative legal teaching methods. More than 100 participants took part in this conference and delivered presentations on the newest teaching methods applied in their countries. While preparing the presentation for Montreal conference, I realized that there is no scientific debate in Lithuania about teaching methods applied in universities or other higher schools that educate lawyers at all. First, I would like to discuss the problems and challenges that influence the search of more advanced methods in legal education. 1) It is obvious that we witness drastic global transformation processes. These processes influence the contents of law studies and teaching methodology to a great extent. Topics, such as world economic crisis, free movement of services, among them legal services and education, foreign investment, the destruction of authoritarian regimes, the birth of new nations / states, the more significant role of non governmental organizations are the reality of the world we live in today. High technologies, the Internet, informational websites link us with the remotest parts of the world at a click of a mouse. As a result, the society has become much more open, accessible and receptive both to positive and negative impacts of globalization. Can we, as teachers, claim to be preparing our students for these challenges? 2) It is noticeable that there are changes not only in the surrounding world; our students have changed a lot too.[...]
      90  160
  • Publication
    Ar raštiškas pranešimas bendraturčiui apie ketinimą parduoti dalį, esančią bendrojoje nuosavybėje, yra oferta?
    [Whether written announcement to a co-owner about the intention to sell the share of commonly owned property is an offer?]
    research article
    Belickienė, Kristina
    Teisės apžvalga, 2010, nr. 1(6), p. 96-127
    Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania. Article 4.79. Priority right to buy shares held in coownership1. Co-owners shall enjoy the right to buy the share in sale of the commonly owned property at a price at which it is sold, and under the same conditions, with the exception of cases when the sale takes the form of a public auction.2. The seller of a share commonly owned shall inform the other co-owners in written form about the intention to sell his part to others than the co-owners, indicating the price and other conditions of sale. When a share of an immovable thing commonly owned is sold, such information shall be given through a notary. When the other co-owners renounce their priorityright to buy the share or fail to use such right to the immovable thing within one month, and to other thing, within ten days from the day of receipt of such notification, provided the co-owners have not agreed otherwise, the seller shall have the right to sell his share to any person. 3. If the share is sold in violation of priority right to buy it, the other co-owner shall have the right, within three months, to demand through court, the transfer of buyer’s rights and obligations to him.4. The seller and buyer of a share of common property are jointly responsible for the obligations pertaining to the share of the thing on sale, arising from the sale of the thing with regard to the other co-owners.The article 4.79 of Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania, contains provisions according to which the property rights realization by the chosen - by buying-selling contract type - are conditioned by the legal regime of property resulting co-owners priority rights [...].
      322  120
  • research article ;
    Teisės apžvalga = Law review [elektroninis išteklius]. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2010, nr. 1(6), p. 128-147
    Global computer software piracy has become an enormous problem as the computer software industry has grown at an increasing pace over the last decade. Therefore, a very topical issue in intellectual property law has been and still is the best form of software protection. The true value of computer programs is derived from the text or code that remains hidden from the computer user. What is valuable is not the text, but the behavior of the computer, i.e. the way the computer interfaces with the user. The real benefit to the average consumer is what he sees on the screen and how it interfaces with him. Therefore, the protection must be selected in compliance with this specific feature of software. There are two typical legal regimes under which computer software might be protected: copyrights and patents. Patent protection requires disclosure of the invention to the public. In return, the holder of the patent receives a twenty–year monopoly which effectively prevents others from making, using or selling the invention without the authorization from the patentee. Copyright does not protect idea behind an expression, but just that particular expression of the idea. As a result, copyright allows the copyright owner no rights against persons who independently create similar or identical subject matter. Moreover, it does not forbid reverse engineering.[...]
      222  352
  • Publication
    Ar fiziniam asmeniui, vykdžiusiam represijas sovietinės okupacijos metais, gali būti taikoma civilinė atsakomybė už turtinę ir neturtinę žalą?
    [Can natural person, who conducted repressions during Soviet occupation, be held liable for pecuniary and non¬pecuniary damages?]
    research article
    Teisės apžvalga = Law review [elektroninis išteklius]. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2010, nr. 1(6), p. 53-95
    The twentieth century in Lithuanian history was marked with soviet occupation lasting for almost fifty years. During soviet occupation mass atrocities were committed against innocent people such as persecution on political, national, religious grounds, murder, extermination, forcible transportation, deprivation of physical liberty and other acts causing great suffering, serious injury to mental and physical health. Repressive structures were organized by occupying force, the USSR, and acts committed by natural persons working for occupying forces. Because of these atrocities many people experienced harm causing pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages. As these damages must be compensated, the main issue of this thesis is whether tort liability shall be applied to natural person for committing atrocities during soviet occupation to remunerate pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages? The restoration of independence in Lithuania provided ability to evaluate atrocities committed against innocent Lithuanian people. On the strength of principles formed in Nuremberg process, Charter of the United Nations and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, acts committed in Lithuania during soviet occupation shall be recognized as gross human rights violations. Regaining independence after the condition of mass human rights violations, Lithuania entered into status of transitional justice state as the respect for human rights, justice and democratic values were declared. Therefore Lithuania has obligation to restore human rights of those people who suffered from gross human rights violations. The important part of this obligation is compensation for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages suffered. Unfortunately Lithuanian law for compensating victims of gross human rights violations during soviet occupation does not provide adequate compensation.[...]
      214  157
  • research article
    Teisės apžvalga = Law review [elektroninis išteklius]. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla, 2010, nr. 1(6), p. 16-52
    The author of this article raised question if the insolvency of a State is the legitimate basis for suspension or repudiation on international financial obligations. Since there is no uniform way to deal with the issue, the attention is given to different practices and guidelines of court’s reasoning. In order to answer the legal question, prove or neglect the hypothesis and fulfill goals descriptive, analytical and comparative methods are used. The paper consists of four major parts and proceeds in the following order. Part one provides general understanding of State as subject of international law, gives basic legal characteristics of Sovereign debt, introduces the legal definition of insolvent State and explores responsibility of the State in case of unilateral suspension or repudiation on external public debt.[...]
      143  106