Bitcoin is the most important and well known form of digital currency. It is not produced or backed by any single entity. Its production takes place in a decentralised manner and its value derives only from the fact that there is a growing community that attributes value to it and chooses to transact using this innovative means of payment. However, its importance is increasing, especially in the field of e-commerce.
The main aim of this article is to examine the consumer’s right of withdrawal, as it is regulated in the Consumer Rights Directive (Directive 2011/83/EU), in case of payments with bitcoins. More specifically, it is examined whether a consumer’s payment with bitcoins can be a hindrance to the consumer’s protection, with respect to the withdrawal right provided by the aforementioned Directive in cases of distance and off-premises contracts. Furthermore, the consequences of the exercise of the withdrawal right are examined, particularly with regards to reimbursement. The main concerns derive from the bitcoin’s disputed legal nature and its high value volatility.
A number of scholars have argued that addressing the significant environmental problems we face today is not merely a matter of finding technical or technological solutions, it also requires that we interrogate our assumptions about the nature of our own humanness and come to terms with what this means for how we behave towards nature. This paper argues that human rights courts engage in questions of human nature and value through their use of the concept of ‘human dignity’ and, as a result, it is a concept that may have an important role to play in human rights cases of an environmental nature. Historically, however, dignity is a concept concerned with the superiority of humanity to the rest of nature, and one thought to be anthropocentric and antithetical to environmental concerns. This paper considers whether human dignity might nevertheless have a beneficial role to play in environmental adjudication by considering its role in legal adjudication from a pragmatic perspective. This paper considers an approach to dignity proposed by Jeff Malpas – one that sees humans as embedded in and constituted by place – and examines whether this approach might impact on the course of judicial reasoning in environmental cases.
This article examines the impact of the protection against discrimination guarantee in family law cases that raise questions related to private international law. The steady incorporation of international human rights protection against gender discrimination into positive Norwegian law implies a stronger focus on human rights in legal cases in which private international law is applied. The focus of the article is on the ordre public reservation as a means of harmonising private international law rules and human rights rules. This is illustrated by assessing the interpretation of the ordre public reservation in the recognition of foreign talaq divorces in Norway. This interpretation rests on human rights law, as it has been understood and implemented in Norwegian law, in legal scholarship and by administrative authorities. The findings suggest that the one-sided focus on connection in private international law should be altered to align better with the unilateral protection against discrimination that follows from international human rights law. Accordingly, the strong focus on the result in the assessment of the ordre public reservation should be altered to capture more fully the procedural and underlying regulations informing cases of a discriminatory nature.