Oppgrader til nyeste versjon av Internet eksplorer for best mulig visning av siden. Klikk her for for å skjule denne meldingen
Ikke pålogget
{{session.user.firstName}} {{session.user.lastName}}
Du har tilgang til Idunn gjennom , & {{sessionPartyGroup.name}}
Peer reviewed article
Åpen tilgang
Vitenskapelig publikasjon
(side 4-20)
av Alla Pozdnakova

The Brussels I Regulation is crucial for the effectiveness of EU competition law in the field of private enforcement because it provides a legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, which includes antitrust damages cases. However, the interaction between the rules governing private enforcement of EU competition law and the Regulation is unclear. This article discusses one of the issues arising from this interaction, namely, whether the public policy objection envisaged in the Regulation may be invoked to refuse recognition and enforcement of an antitrust damages award. The argument advanced in this article is that the public policy exception can be invoked successfully in the case of a serious violation of the procedural rights of the defendant. By contrast, the public policy exception is generally not applicable if enforcement of a foreign award may lead to infringement of substantive national provisions, even those of fundamental importance for the Member State in which enforcement is sought. This would go against the rights and principles of EU competition law, such as the principle of effectiveness and the right to full compensation for antitrust-related damages.

Åpen tilgang
Vitenskapelig publikasjon
(side 21-41)
av Patricia Kameri-Mbote

Kenya has made significant strides in overhauling its legislation to better deal with gender discrimination. However, the legislative steps taken seemingly understate the environment of legal pluralism that characterises the Kenyan state where, for instance, customary law is still pervasive and operates side by side with formal laws. The traditional approach generally gives premium to formal laws while treating customary law with scepticism or altogether disdain in the hope that all individuals will ultimately transition to formal laws. Yet, this has not necessarily been the case. Customary law continues to survive and thrive. Accordingly, this paper argues for a departure from the jaundiced view that customary law only serves to further gender inequalities. The paper argues for a more balanced approach that recognises that customary law has aspects that could be harnessed to foster gender equality and thus complement formal laws on gender equality. In rooting for an appreciation of the role and place of legal pluralism in promoting gender equality, the paper contends that formal laws in and of themselves are not enough to effectively deal with gender discrimination; the two must operate side by side, not necessarily one below the other, as has been the case.

Åpen tilgang
Vitenskapelig publikasjon
(side 42-66)
av Sevda Clark

This paper offers a deconstruction of the framing of childhood and child rights as ‘disability’, arguing for a strengthening of the legal personhood of children, based on the revolution of personhood and the re-making of the human condition in the disability rights movement. As the general debate on children’s legal capacity and standing tends to take place from within the traditional liberal and existing legal paradigms of children’s rights – which emphasise the legal disability of children and their lack of agency – it occurs in isolation from the broader theoretical debates on personhood and capacity. In re-imagining disability, new insights can be gained by reflecting on the scholarship from other perspectives, such as disability theory.

Oslo Law Review

1-2018, volume 5


Oslo Law Review was established in 2014, and publishes research articles from all areas of legal scholarship, as well as interdisciplinary articles or articles that engage with law from the perspective of other related disciplines (e.g. political science, anthropology, sociology, linguistics and philosophy).


Professor Lee A. Bygrave, Department of Private Law, University of Oslo

Professor Vibeke Blaker Strand, Department of Public and International Law, University of Oslo


Research Assistant Brendan J. Nixon, Department of Private Law, University of Oslo


Professor Vidar Halvorsen, Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law, University of Oslo

Doctoral Research Fellow Anders Narvestad, Department of Public and International Law, University of Oslo

Professor Alla Pozdnakova, Scandinavian Institute of Maritime Law, University of Oslo

Editorial Board

Professor Shaheen Sardar Ali, University of Warwick

Professor Bert Jaap Koops, University of Tilburg

Professor Elise Poillot, University of Luxembourg

Professor Giovanni Sartor, European University Institute/University of Bologna

Professor Emeritus Carsten Smith, University of Oslo

Professor Lawrence Solum, Georgetown University


Design and typesetting: Type-it AS, Trondheim

Cover design: Scandinavian University Press, Sissel Tjernstad

ISSN online:  2387-3299

DOI: 10.18261/issn.2387-3299


The journal is published by Scandinavian University Press (Universitetsforlaget) on behalf of the Faculty of Law at the University of Oslo.

Idunn bruker informasjonskapsler (cookies). Ved å fortsette å bruke nettsiden godtar du dette. Klikk her for mer informasjon