Abstract Certain legal instruments have been developed in business transactions in order to facilitate the conclusion of an agreement under negotiation. The instruments of this kind are called precontractual agreements. They play an important role in shaping the legal situation of entities involved in the negotiation process. The basis for concluding precontractual agreements is the main principle of civil law, namely, the principle of freedom of contract. The most often mentioned precontractual agreements include a letter of intent and an agreement to negotiate. A letter of intent is a statement of intent to conclude an agreement in the future, although at a later stage of the letters exchange, they may also include statements of intent to continue negotiations. Legal doctrine has not developed a consistent categorization of letters of intent. Such attempts are limited to separating a number of terms, which intrinsically describe similar legal instruments. furthermore, an agreement to negotiate is a separate type of unnamed agreement, which aims to prepare the procedure of concluding the final contract through negotiation. It is a temporary contract related to a specific agreement which it concerns. An agreement to negotiate is a due diligence agreement. The infringement of provisions of an agreement to negotiate will result in contractual liability. The aim of the article is to answer the question whether, at the current stage of shaping legal relations, it is necessary to regulate precontractual agreements at the level of Eu legislation in order to harmonize them in the European union.
{"title":"Precontractual Agreements in Selected Legal Systems","authors":"Piotr Sławicki","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Certain legal instruments have been developed in business transactions in order to facilitate the conclusion of an agreement under negotiation. The instruments of this kind are called precontractual agreements. They play an important role in shaping the legal situation of entities involved in the negotiation process. The basis for concluding precontractual agreements is the main principle of civil law, namely, the principle of freedom of contract. The most often mentioned precontractual agreements include a letter of intent and an agreement to negotiate. A letter of intent is a statement of intent to conclude an agreement in the future, although at a later stage of the letters exchange, they may also include statements of intent to continue negotiations. Legal doctrine has not developed a consistent categorization of letters of intent. Such attempts are limited to separating a number of terms, which intrinsically describe similar legal instruments. furthermore, an agreement to negotiate is a separate type of unnamed agreement, which aims to prepare the procedure of concluding the final contract through negotiation. It is a temporary contract related to a specific agreement which it concerns. An agreement to negotiate is a due diligence agreement. The infringement of provisions of an agreement to negotiate will result in contractual liability. The aim of the article is to answer the question whether, at the current stage of shaping legal relations, it is necessary to regulate precontractual agreements at the level of Eu legislation in order to harmonize them in the European union.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"26 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44581089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Higher education institutions around the world have embarked on complex journeys of organizational change to facilitate the transition towards a more competent and educated society, especially one able to adapt to advanced and sustainable political, economic and sociotechnical paradigms. in this context, leading universities have adopted the Research-Based (rB) approach as a fundamental component of their strategies to bring closer together their main educational activities: teaching, learning and research. However, in spite of ample efforts, serious shortcomings at the implementation level are commonly reported. Especially revealing are the students’ limited self-reliance, confidence, and academic research and writing skills documented in the literature. This article examines and updates the concept of Research-Based maps and explores the multilevel regulatory framework that has conditioned the implementation and alignment of educational initiatives, including the institutional arrangements that are common in public universities in the European union, and in Estonia, as an example. it enhances the understanding of complex institutional and regulatory interactions in general, emphasizing the importance of reflexive and well justified normative determination.
{"title":"Regulatory Framework of the Research-Based Approach to Education in the EU","authors":"Kristi Joamets, M. Vasquez","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0024","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Higher education institutions around the world have embarked on complex journeys of organizational change to facilitate the transition towards a more competent and educated society, especially one able to adapt to advanced and sustainable political, economic and sociotechnical paradigms. in this context, leading universities have adopted the Research-Based (rB) approach as a fundamental component of their strategies to bring closer together their main educational activities: teaching, learning and research. However, in spite of ample efforts, serious shortcomings at the implementation level are commonly reported. Especially revealing are the students’ limited self-reliance, confidence, and academic research and writing skills documented in the literature. This article examines and updates the concept of Research-Based maps and explores the multilevel regulatory framework that has conditioned the implementation and alignment of educational initiatives, including the institutional arrangements that are common in public universities in the European union, and in Estonia, as an example. it enhances the understanding of complex institutional and regulatory interactions in general, emphasizing the importance of reflexive and well justified normative determination.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"109 - 136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44334723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Preparing for elections during election campaigning has been topical in every era. In the 19th century, new methods for carrying out election campaigns were developed in the United States. The Americanization of election campaigns is characterized by political personalization, the special role of the media in a pre-election period, brittle ideological grounds and particular specialization of the political campaign. A plethora of different concepts have been coined to explain this process, including ‘Americanization’ and ‘professionalization’. As the uS is identified as the origin of election campaigning trends, these assumed convergences came to be known in academic writing as ‘Americanization’. Election campaigning was in need of professionals hired to navigate the campaign’s strategy. With the emergence of campaign advisors, the term ‘professionalization’ was introduced. In Georgia, the first steps on the way to statehood were made at the beginning of the 1990s, following the 70 years of Soviet rule. in post-Soviet Georgia, multiparty and competitive elections enabled political parties to use foreign experience in political campaigning. The goal of the present article is to define the existing election campaign model in Georgia, and especially, to examine the tendencies of Americanization in the election campaigns in Georgia in the period of 1990–2016. According to the research hypothesis, the weak institutionalization of the party system creates a favorable ground for the Americanization of political campaigning. in the 1990s, the weak representativeness of Georgian parties played an important role in political campaigning since the very beginning. in the research process, the characteristics of political campaigns in post-Soviet Georgia were analyzed. This study makes use of qualitative research methods, including: (a) expert interviews with political consultants; (b) in-depth interviews with representatives of political parties; and (c) in-depth interviews with the selected electorate. Qualitative research methods were chosen for the work for the purpose of understanding the tendencies of the Americanization of election campaigning in Georgia from the respondents’ perspective. Qualitative methods are more explicit and descriptive, and by gathering responses like these, it is possible to gain a deeper understanding of the subject.
{"title":"Election Campaigning: The Case of Georgia","authors":"G. Melikidze","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0018","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Preparing for elections during election campaigning has been topical in every era. In the 19th century, new methods for carrying out election campaigns were developed in the United States. The Americanization of election campaigns is characterized by political personalization, the special role of the media in a pre-election period, brittle ideological grounds and particular specialization of the political campaign. A plethora of different concepts have been coined to explain this process, including ‘Americanization’ and ‘professionalization’. As the uS is identified as the origin of election campaigning trends, these assumed convergences came to be known in academic writing as ‘Americanization’. Election campaigning was in need of professionals hired to navigate the campaign’s strategy. With the emergence of campaign advisors, the term ‘professionalization’ was introduced. In Georgia, the first steps on the way to statehood were made at the beginning of the 1990s, following the 70 years of Soviet rule. in post-Soviet Georgia, multiparty and competitive elections enabled political parties to use foreign experience in political campaigning. The goal of the present article is to define the existing election campaign model in Georgia, and especially, to examine the tendencies of Americanization in the election campaigns in Georgia in the period of 1990–2016. According to the research hypothesis, the weak institutionalization of the party system creates a favorable ground for the Americanization of political campaigning. in the 1990s, the weak representativeness of Georgian parties played an important role in political campaigning since the very beginning. in the research process, the characteristics of political campaigns in post-Soviet Georgia were analyzed. This study makes use of qualitative research methods, including: (a) expert interviews with political consultants; (b) in-depth interviews with representatives of political parties; and (c) in-depth interviews with the selected electorate. Qualitative research methods were chosen for the work for the purpose of understanding the tendencies of the Americanization of election campaigning in Georgia from the respondents’ perspective. Qualitative methods are more explicit and descriptive, and by gathering responses like these, it is possible to gain a deeper understanding of the subject.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"117 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45303956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article provides a critical legal analysis of Georgia’s regulations on the interim dividend payment and highlights the necessity of proper amendments to comply with European company law. Since having an EU-Georgia Association Agreement signed, the dynamic process of Europeanization has put various legislative changes on the agenda, which also regard shareholders’ proprietary rights. This article briefly gives a novel insight into the distribution of interim dividends from a comparative point of view. It suggests the possibly scrutinized coverage of the legal preconditions along with liability consequences for the interim dividend declaration from the perspective of both shareholders and joint stock companies in Georgia. The article emphasizes the structure of the corporation, which naturally bedrocks the potential conflict of interests between the shareholders and creditors. The topic also endorses questioning Georgia’s rules on capital maintenance in relation to the interim dividend distribution. Hence, the study reveals prevailing regulatory lapses and makes pertinent recommendations on the alignment of the financial interests of those mentioned. Last but not least, the article exposes how directors on the credible basis of their fiduciary duties are assigned to divert assets of the corporation since their rationality in decision-making is expected to meet the best interests of the company.
{"title":"Transforming Georgia’s regulations on Shareholders’ right to interim dividend Confronting the European Company Law","authors":"Ana Tokhadze","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0015","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article provides a critical legal analysis of Georgia’s regulations on the interim dividend payment and highlights the necessity of proper amendments to comply with European company law. Since having an EU-Georgia Association Agreement signed, the dynamic process of Europeanization has put various legislative changes on the agenda, which also regard shareholders’ proprietary rights. This article briefly gives a novel insight into the distribution of interim dividends from a comparative point of view. It suggests the possibly scrutinized coverage of the legal preconditions along with liability consequences for the interim dividend declaration from the perspective of both shareholders and joint stock companies in Georgia. The article emphasizes the structure of the corporation, which naturally bedrocks the potential conflict of interests between the shareholders and creditors. The topic also endorses questioning Georgia’s rules on capital maintenance in relation to the interim dividend distribution. Hence, the study reveals prevailing regulatory lapses and makes pertinent recommendations on the alignment of the financial interests of those mentioned. Last but not least, the article exposes how directors on the credible basis of their fiduciary duties are assigned to divert assets of the corporation since their rationality in decision-making is expected to meet the best interests of the company.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"57 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46733713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article elaborates on the topic of the new wave of evolution of the protection of intellectual property in Georgia inspired by signing the Eu–Georgia Association Agreement, (AA—the Association Agreement between Georgia and the Eu and the nuclear Energy Association of Europe and its Member States). The harmonization process is an impressive field of law on its own. The article deals only with particular issues, such as the role and critical characteristics of the harmonization of intellectual property protection and enforcement mechanisms in Georgia. In this context, the article examines the legal nature of the amendments to the Civil procedure Code of Georgia (GCpC), in particular, a new chapter of enforcement regulations, that has been introduced to the GCPC—‘Specificities in proceedings of the infringement of exclusive right of intellectual property’. The article is predicated upon the allegation that the new legal introductions are merely of a formal character, while the enforcement mechanisms and remedies, as a significant part of Georgian civil legislation, had already been in place and Georgia had ratified major international intellectual property agreements. The article deals with the legal problem of the application of the intellectual property enforcement amendments by the judiciary and measures the practical impact. The hypothesis of the analysis is to consider whether further developments are necessary to contribute to a consistent approach to the adjudication of intellectual property enforcement disputes in Georgian courts and to promote the efficient implementation of the novel intellectual property enforcement mechanisms into the Georgian legal system. The analysis of the characteristics of the impact of harmonization on intellectual property as of intangible rights proves to have wide-ranging benefits for the holders of intellectual property in Georgia or elsewhere in Europe.
{"title":"Recent Evolution of Intellectual Property Enforcement in Georgia","authors":"Tamar Taliashvili, Irakli Shamatava","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0014","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article elaborates on the topic of the new wave of evolution of the protection of intellectual property in Georgia inspired by signing the Eu–Georgia Association Agreement, (AA—the Association Agreement between Georgia and the Eu and the nuclear Energy Association of Europe and its Member States). The harmonization process is an impressive field of law on its own. The article deals only with particular issues, such as the role and critical characteristics of the harmonization of intellectual property protection and enforcement mechanisms in Georgia. In this context, the article examines the legal nature of the amendments to the Civil procedure Code of Georgia (GCpC), in particular, a new chapter of enforcement regulations, that has been introduced to the GCPC—‘Specificities in proceedings of the infringement of exclusive right of intellectual property’. The article is predicated upon the allegation that the new legal introductions are merely of a formal character, while the enforcement mechanisms and remedies, as a significant part of Georgian civil legislation, had already been in place and Georgia had ratified major international intellectual property agreements. The article deals with the legal problem of the application of the intellectual property enforcement amendments by the judiciary and measures the practical impact. The hypothesis of the analysis is to consider whether further developments are necessary to contribute to a consistent approach to the adjudication of intellectual property enforcement disputes in Georgian courts and to promote the efficient implementation of the novel intellectual property enforcement mechanisms into the Georgian legal system. The analysis of the characteristics of the impact of harmonization on intellectual property as of intangible rights proves to have wide-ranging benefits for the holders of intellectual property in Georgia or elsewhere in Europe.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"42 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49049627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The article discusses the latest wave of the higher education quality assurance (QA) reform, implemented by the Government of Georgia in response to its obligations envisaged by the EU–Georgia Association Agreement and its consequent Association Agenda 2017–2020. We argue that Eu conditionality was a major driving factor for the modernization of Georgian QA system according to the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG 2015), and even though the reform was mostly implemented in the framework of the country’s EU integration, an expected reward in the form of the membership of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) granted to the national Center for Educational Quality Enhancement (NCEQE) of Georgia was the major driving force for implementing the reform successfully. While this reward-driven reform has resulted in the ENQA membership, it has not inevitably led to building a sustainable, independent and development-oriented external quality assurance system for the enhancement of Georgian higher education. Therefore, the entire QA reform was merely aimed at “talking the EU talk” (Schimmelfennig & Sedelmeier, 2005, p. 27) by the Georgian government instead of actually being focused on the development of internal “quality culture” in Georgian higher education institutions.
本文讨论了格鲁吉亚政府为响应欧盟-格鲁吉亚协会协议及其随后的2017-2020年协会议程所设想的义务而实施的最新一波高等教育质量保证(QA)改革。我们认为，根据欧洲质量保证标准和指南(ESG 2015)，欧盟条件是格鲁吉亚质量保证体系现代化的主要驱动因素，尽管改革主要是在该国的欧盟一体化框架内实施的，格鲁吉亚国家教育质量提高中心(NCEQE)获得欧洲高等教育质量保证协会(ENQA)会员资格，这是成功实施改革的主要动力。虽然这种奖励驱动的改革导致了ENQA的成员资格，但它并没有不可避免地导致建立一个可持续的、独立的和面向发展的外部质量保证体系，以提高格鲁吉亚的高等教育。因此，格鲁吉亚政府的整个QA改革仅仅是为了“讲欧盟话”(schimmelfenni&sedelmeier, 2005, p. 27)，而不是真正关注格鲁吉亚高等教育机构内部“质量文化”的发展。
{"title":"“Conditioned” Quality Assurance of Higher Education in Georgia: Talking the EU Talk","authors":"Mariam Amashukeli, D. Lezhava, M. Chitashvili","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0016","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article discusses the latest wave of the higher education quality assurance (QA) reform, implemented by the Government of Georgia in response to its obligations envisaged by the EU–Georgia Association Agreement and its consequent Association Agenda 2017–2020. We argue that Eu conditionality was a major driving factor for the modernization of Georgian QA system according to the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG 2015), and even though the reform was mostly implemented in the framework of the country’s EU integration, an expected reward in the form of the membership of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) granted to the national Center for Educational Quality Enhancement (NCEQE) of Georgia was the major driving force for implementing the reform successfully. While this reward-driven reform has resulted in the ENQA membership, it has not inevitably led to building a sustainable, independent and development-oriented external quality assurance system for the enhancement of Georgian higher education. Therefore, the entire QA reform was merely aimed at “talking the EU talk” (Schimmelfennig & Sedelmeier, 2005, p. 27) by the Georgian government instead of actually being focused on the development of internal “quality culture” in Georgian higher education institutions.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"75 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42251226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The present article is devoted to the research on the admissibility of expulsion of a partner from a limited liability company (LLC) based on the ground that is not envisaged in the charter, and on respective dogmatic normative grounds in Georgian law. The importance of research in legal studies and judge-made law1 is revealed in the fact that the situation in which the action of a partner is directed against the interests of the company and becomes an obstacle for the achievement of a common goal, and it becomes impossible to retain the partner remains outside of Georgian normative reality. The aim of the research requires an analysis of German law, assimilated in the context of the Georgian solution, as well as the description of civil legal grounds for exclusion and prerequisites for admissibility, a study of the legal nature of the society and dogmatic support to the application of the civil law regime for the termination of long-term contractual relations. The suggested Georgian solution in this matter shares the spirit of German law policy; however, it is outstanding in its individuality.
{"title":"Expulsion of a Shareholder from a Limited Liability Company on Substantial Grounds","authors":"I. Burduli, N. Chitashvili","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present article is devoted to the research on the admissibility of expulsion of a partner from a limited liability company (LLC) based on the ground that is not envisaged in the charter, and on respective dogmatic normative grounds in Georgian law. The importance of research in legal studies and judge-made law1 is revealed in the fact that the situation in which the action of a partner is directed against the interests of the company and becomes an obstacle for the achievement of a common goal, and it becomes impossible to retain the partner remains outside of Georgian normative reality. The aim of the research requires an analysis of German law, assimilated in the context of the Georgian solution, as well as the description of civil legal grounds for exclusion and prerequisites for admissibility, a study of the legal nature of the society and dogmatic support to the application of the civil law regime for the termination of long-term contractual relations. The suggested Georgian solution in this matter shares the spirit of German law policy; however, it is outstanding in its individuality.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"7 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47676050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TalTech Journal of European Studies (TJES) has recently undergone a change in its focus, and also the name of the journal has changed from the Baltic Journal of European Studies to the current one. The journal’s scope has changed accordingly, and now encompasses digitalisation a nd technology implementation, and their impact on the social, legal, political, economic and cultural domains in the European Union and its Member States.
{"title":"Georgia on its path to Europeanisation: Academic Cooperation","authors":"Archil Chochia, T. Kerikmäe","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0011","url":null,"abstract":"TalTech Journal of European Studies (TJES) has recently undergone a change in its focus, and also the name of the journal has changed from the Baltic Journal of European Studies to the current one. The journal’s scope has changed accordingly, and now encompasses digitalisation a nd technology implementation, and their impact on the social, legal, political, economic and cultural domains in the European Union and its Member States.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"3 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45394739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract From the strategic point of view, not all foreign direct investments (FDI) are always positively benefiting the host economy, i.e. not all multinational enterprises (MnEs) are promoting local host economies. Even more, not all FDIs are equally beneficial to different sectors within the same economy. The fact is that fdi can impact different sectors in various ways, and the impact is not only based on the amount of fdi itself but on MnEs’ motivations and the peculiarities of the host economy, which can differ from country to county. in other words, only fdi numbers aggregated per year are not really giving a comprehensive picture of the situation and in many cases lead to incorrect strategic decisions, as it has happened in many countries, including Georgia.
{"title":"The Impact of FDI on Economic Development: The Case of Georgia","authors":"Vakhtang Charaia, Archil Chochia, Mariam Lashkhi","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract From the strategic point of view, not all foreign direct investments (FDI) are always positively benefiting the host economy, i.e. not all multinational enterprises (MnEs) are promoting local host economies. Even more, not all FDIs are equally beneficial to different sectors within the same economy. The fact is that fdi can impact different sectors in various ways, and the impact is not only based on the amount of fdi itself but on MnEs’ motivations and the peculiarities of the host economy, which can differ from country to county. in other words, only fdi numbers aggregated per year are not really giving a comprehensive picture of the situation and in many cases lead to incorrect strategic decisions, as it has happened in many countries, including Georgia.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"96 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44689985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The ancient history of the concept of condominium and the particular attitude towards the right of ownership of an apartment has attracted worldwide recognition for this type of property. The concept of condominium is based on three components: (1) individual ownership of an apartment; (2) joint possession of common property of a plot of land and parts of a building; and (3) membership in an owners’ association. An apartment in a condominium is an exception to the principle of superficies solo cedit in property law. In this case, the rights of ownership of owners of apartments in a condominium—the rights of ownership of a number of persons—are accumulated with regard to a plot of land. This article analyses, on the one hand, the peculiarities of apartment ownership in condominiums, Georgian legislation—which is the result of the reception of German civil law, and, on the other hand, the court practice developed on these issues in Georgian law.
{"title":"Apartment ownership in a Condominium under Georgian Law","authors":"Tamar Zarandia, Tamar Tatanashvili","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0013","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The ancient history of the concept of condominium and the particular attitude towards the right of ownership of an apartment has attracted worldwide recognition for this type of property. The concept of condominium is based on three components: (1) individual ownership of an apartment; (2) joint possession of common property of a plot of land and parts of a building; and (3) membership in an owners’ association. An apartment in a condominium is an exception to the principle of superficies solo cedit in property law. In this case, the rights of ownership of owners of apartments in a condominium—the rights of ownership of a number of persons—are accumulated with regard to a plot of land. This article analyses, on the one hand, the peculiarities of apartment ownership in condominiums, Georgian legislation—which is the result of the reception of German civil law, and, on the other hand, the court practice developed on these issues in Georgian law.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"28 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47627300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：