Commentaries more



140. Cosmos Nike Nwedu, The Rise of Force Majeure amid the Coronavirus Pandemic: Legitimacy and Implications for Energy Laws and Contracts, 2021.03.01, The global outbreak of coronavirus disease has become one of humanity's greatest challenges. The energy sector has also been impacted, as it has seen episodic low prices of oil. This scenario is due to less demand for oil amid various containment measures and related health policies of governments worldwide. The performance of existing oil and gas contracts has been rendered impracticable in some parts of the world. This has resulted in parties invoking force majeure clauses as an excuse. However, the legitimacy of coronavirus as an acceptable force majeure has emerged controversial. This article, adopting an analytical approach, makes a case for coronavirus as a typical instance of force majeure for energy contracts or sales and purchase agreements, which can only avail defense depending on parties' contractual force majeure provisions. This article offers an understanding of force majeure alongside required fundamentals. Likewise, it highlights current debates about force majeure and likely impacts on future energy law contracts.

139. Jason M. Groth, Sara Wolovick, Overcoming Deliberate Indifference to the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2021.03.01, This article will discuss the thus far nearly insurmountable obstacle of the deliberate indifference standard in Eighth Amendment litigation in Section II. Section III considers the possibility of claims under Utah Constitution's unnecessary rigor clause being brought to test cases under the less burdensome standard of unnecessary abuse. Section IV examines how an unnecessary rigor analysis may benefit litigation that would likely be fruitless under a cruel and unusual punishment analysis that uses the deliberate indifference standard.

138. Ana Santos Rutschman, Property and Intellectual Property in Vaccine Markets, 2021.05.02, This Essay begins by mapping the dualism in vaccine research & development and commercialization, describing both "happy" and "unhappy" markets. It then connects the development of new vaccines with the default legal regime to promote innovation in the patent system. In exploring possible solutions for transactional problems arising in connection with the development of vaccine technology, this Essay asks whether the rights covering vaccine technologies are best understood as property rights or as something else. this Essay concludes by exploring how less property-like protection-in the form of a liability regime for critical components of vaccine technology-can remove some of the most salient transactional obstacles to the development and commercialization of new and better vaccines.

137. Yee-Fui Ng, Stephen Gray, Wars, Pandemics and Emergencies: What Can History Tell Us about Executive Power and Surveillance in Times of Crisis, 2021.04.01, In the fight against coronavirus, the Australian government has enacted a series of measures that represent an expansion of executive powers. These include the use of smartphone contact-tracing technology, mandatory isolation arrangements, and the closure of businesses. Critics have expressed concerns about the long-term implications of these measures upon individual rights. This article will analyse the validity of such concerns in the context of other historical uses of executive power in Australia in times of crisis: during the Spanish Flu pandemic of]918, the First and Second World Wars, and the 'War on Terror' post-September 2001. Drawing its conclusions from these historical precedents, the article argues that clear legislative safeguards are a minimum necessary step both to prevent police and governmental abuse of privacy, and to foster and maintain trust in the government's ability to manage their powers in a manner consistent with human rights.

136. Michelle Foster, Helene Lamber, Jane McAdam, Refugee Protection in the COVID-19 Crisis and beyond: The Capacity and Limits of International Law, 2021.04.01, The current pandemic and concomitant framework of crisis has led to unprecedented restrictions on global movement, and hence on the ability of refugees to seek protection. These measures have been implemented as a matter of urgency, yet risk violating international refugee and human rights law. This experience provides an opportunity to reflect on an equally compellingthreat, namely displacement linked to the impacts of climate change. This article considers these twin challenges and reflects on the capacity and limits ofinternational law to address both crises, while balancing the competing rights and interests at stake. It argues that a key challenge for international law and policy is how to harness the sense ofurgency generated by COVID-19 for the long-term 'climate crisis'.

Beijing Interest Group on Global Health and Global Governance
京ICP备20029057号 京ICP备20029057号-1 京ICP备20029057号-2 京ICP备20029057号-3