Spring 2018 issue of IALS Student Law Review just published

IALS Student Law Review cover

The latest issue of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies Student Law Review (ISLRev), Volume 5, Issue 1, Spring 2018,  is now available on the SAS Open Journals system: http://journals.sas.ac.uk/lawreview/issue/view/376/showToc

In this issue:

  • Syed Zulkifil Haider Shah assesses the initial reception and more recent responses to the work of the French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser, considering the contemporary relevance of major concepts in Althusser’s Theory of Ideology (particularly his view of Interpellation) to accounts of the political subjectivities under the global capitalist order. The article seeks to demonstrate how many of Althusser’s critics (writing in the 1970s and 1980s) misunderstood Althusser’s claims for the most part, and employed a narrow and simplistic view of his works. Such an argument is informed by the more recent literature on Althusser (post 2000s) and builds itself upon an exclusive reading of Althusser’s own texts, primarily his classic essay, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.
  • Jan De Bruyne and Dr. Cedric Vanleenhove consider implications related to the commercialisation of self-driving or autonomous cars which could soon be available on the market. They suggest that Society in general and the applicable rules in particular will undergo a transformation following the introduction of autonomous vehicles with several legal challenges needing to be addressed before society will be able to fully enjoy the benefits of self-driving cars. Questions of liability for damage caused by self-driving car have already been addressed in academia but less attention has been devoted to the relationship between autonomous vehicles and the existing private international law rules in the European Union. The membership of some EU Member States of the 1971 Hague Traffic Accidents Convention and/or the 1973 Hague Products Liability Convention impedes the harmonisation of conflict of laws rules in non-contractual matters. In cases concerning liability arising from traffic accidents and in product liability cases, different Member States courts sometimes apply a different national law, reducing foreseeability and legal certainty.
  • Michael Habila Dauda challenges the view that the legislative drafter is not concerned with policy or substance but form. He uses Ann and Robert B. Seidman’s bill drafting process as criteria to compare the drafting process in UK and Nigeria and analyses how the role of drafters in both jurisdictions influence the substance of policy.
  • Constanza Toro examines the reasons to defend a gender neutral approach in legislative drafting, highlighting that there are both justice reasons (inclusiveness) and methodological ones (clarity, precision and unambiguity) to embrace such a policy. The author warns that gender neutral drafting is a necessary but insufficient tool to achieve the broader goal of gender equality. The article approaches the different drafting techniques available to achieve gender neutral drafting and, in this context, offers an analysis of recent Chilean instruction on the matter.
  • Agustin Ricardo Spotorno gives a critical analysis of the “doctrine of piercing the corporate veil” where the owners, shareholders, or members of a corporation or Limited Liability Company can be held personally liable for corporate debts. The author argues that this doctrine and unresolved issues following from it have undermined two cornerstone principles for a modern economy; the separate corporate personality and limited liability. He suggests that after many frustrated attempts to cast light on the matter, the UK Supreme Court justices tried to provide clarity by circumscribing the doctrine to narrow limits in Petrodel Resources Ltd v Prest. He contends, by “piercing” the apparent veil of clarity in that decision and by analysing three subsequent rulings, that the confusion underlying the decision has aggravated the mess, paving the way for the emergence of an “unnamed” and “unrestricted” doctrine now spread among conventional remedies.

Call for papers - next issue Autumn 2018