Background There are nationwide concerns about the unemployment rate among young Dutch cardiologists and the increase in temporary positions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the... Show moreBackground There are nationwide concerns about the unemployment rate among young Dutch cardiologists and the increase in temporary positions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the unemployment rate in this subgroup as well as the length of time between the end of their training and the acquisition of a permanent position. Methods All cardiologists who completed their training between January 2015 and December 2018 were invited to fill in an online questionnaire about their demographic characteristics, professional profile and employment status. The unemployment rate was calculated and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to determine the time between the end of training and the first permanent contract. Results In total, 174 participants were included (mean age 35 +/- 3 years, 64% male, median follow-up 2.3 years (interquartile range 1.4-3.2 years)). The unemployment rate was 0.6% (n = 1). Only 12 participants (7%) started their career with a permanent position. The percentage of cardiologists with a temporary position was 82%, 61% and 33% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. The percentage of cardiologists with a temporary position did not differ with regard to age, gender, holding a PhD degree or type of teaching institution attended (academic vs non-academic). Forty-four per cent of participants perceived the current job market to be problematic. Conclusions The unemployment rate among young cardiologists in the Netherlands was low between 2015 and 2018. The vast majority of cardiologists start their career on a temporary contract. Three years later, 33% still hold temporary positions. Due to the resultant job insecurity, many young cardiologists describe the job market as problematic. Show less
Het Europese non-foodproductveiligheidsrecht bevat productnormen die veelal als publiekrechtelijk worden bestempeld. Bij de harmonisatie gebruikt de Europese wetgever verschillende soorten... Show moreHet Europese non-foodproductveiligheidsrecht bevat productnormen die veelal als publiekrechtelijk worden bestempeld. Bij de harmonisatie gebruikt de Europese wetgever verschillende soorten productnormen, namelijk bindende eisen in richtlijnen en verordeningen en niet-bindende Europese normalisatienormen. De literatuur neemt aan dat Europese productnormen ook invloed kunnen hebben op de privaatrechtelijke normen die gelden in rechtsverhoudingen tussen bijvoorbeeld de eindgebruiker van het product en andere partijen in de handelsketen, alsmede tussen concurrenten. Dit onderzoek beantwoordt de vraag wat de exacte betekenis is van Europese productnormen voor privaatrechtelijke normstelling. Wanneer is een productnorm slechts een van de relevante omstandigheden van het geval bij de formulering van een privaatrechtelijke norm? Wanneer vult een productnorm een privaatrechtelijke norm grotendeels in, in de zin dat de productnorm het uitgangspunt vormt? Van welke omstandigheden en factoren is deze betekenis afhankelijk?Het onderzoek biedt de lezer een nadere introductie in het wat onderbelichte Europese productveiligheidsrecht en beantwoordt de hoofdvraag aan de hand van een Europeesrechtelijk, institutioneel en privaatrechtelijk perspectief. De privaatrechtelijke analyse ziet op de belangrijkste Nederlandse rechtsgronden voor doorwerking van productnormen en bevat rechtsvergelijking met het Engelse en Duitse recht. Bovendien vindt een uitvoerige analyse van Nederlandse feitenrechtspraak plaats om te zien hoe feitenrechters in de praktijk met productnormen bij de invulling van privaatrechtelijke normen omgaan. Het onderzoek besluit met een overzicht van gezichtspunten die behulpzaam kunnen zijn bij het beoordelen van de betekenis van productnormen voor privaatrechtelijke normstelling in concrete gevallen. Show less
The French government has proposed to reform the remaining body of liability law. It hassuggested to codify and modify the well-known principle of non-cumul des responsabilités contractuelleet... Show moreThe French government has proposed to reform the remaining body of liability law. It hassuggested to codify and modify the well-known principle of non-cumul des responsabilités contractuelleet délictuelle, that has originally been developed by the Cour de cassation. This contribution examinesthe government’s proposal from a comparative perspective. This perspective reveals, first of all, that thedecision to allow a concurrent claim in delict or not is not only influenced by the theoretical arguments thatfeature prominently in legal literature, but also by the scope and structure of the laws of contract anddelict. Secondly, the contribution argues that the question of concurrence cannot be settled satisfactorilyas long as important differences between the laws of contract and delict continue to exist. The conclusionmust be that the laws of contract and delict should be reunified as much as possible. Inspiration for suchan approach can be drawn from Dutch private law. Show less
Abstract: This contribution analyses whether, and to what extent, the law permits a choice between finding liability in contract and in tort. The answer to this question is important because the... Show moreAbstract: This contribution analyses whether, and to what extent, the law permits a choice between finding liability in contract and in tort. The answer to this question is important because the outcome of a case may differ depending on whether the claim for damages is based on a breach of contract or on a violation of a tortious duty. The contribution examines the approaches in several European jurisdictions. French law is straightforward: finding liability in tort is not possible if the damage is caused by or related to the (non-) performance of a contractual obligation. German, Dutch and English law take the opposite point of view: finding liability in tort is not precluded if the damage is caused by or related to the (non-) performance of a contractual obligation. This contribution traces the historical development of these approaches and explains their differences by looking at the underlying structure of these systems of private law. It also shows that the resoluteness of both solutions has softened over time, as a result of judicial and legislative interventions. To support this argument, recent developments in case law and legislation are discussed.Résumé: Cette contribution s’interroge sur la question de savoir si – et alors dans quelle mesure – le droit offre un choix entre les actions en responsabilité contractuelle et extracontractuelle. La réponse à cette question est importante car l’issue du litige peut varier selon que la demande en dommages-intérêts est fondée sur la violation d’une norme contractuelle ou extracontractuelle. La présente contribution examine cette question au sein des différents systèmes juridiques. En droit français, la réponse est univoque: la responsabilité extracontractuelle comme base de l’action en justice est impossible si le dommage est causé par ou lié à l’(in)exécution d’un contrat. Les droits allemand, néerlandais et anglais optent pour la solution inverse: utiliser la responsabilité extracontractuelle est possible même si le dommage a été causé par ou lié à l’(in)exécution d’un contrat. La présente contribution analyse le développement historique de ces approches et explique leurs différences en recourant aux structures sous-jacentes des systèmes de droit privé. Il se trouve que la détermination de chacune de ces solutions s’est atténuée avec le temps, à la suite des interventions du juge et du législateur. Pour soutenir cet argument, les développements récents dans la jurisprudence et la législation sont discutés.Zusammenfassung: Dieser Beitrag analysiert ob und in welchem Ausmaß das Zivilrecht eine Wahl zwischen vertraglicher und deliktischer Haftung eröffnet. Die Antwort auf diese Frage ist von Gewicht, denn das Urteil in einem Rechtsstreit kann unterschiedlich ausfallen, je nachdem, ob die Klage auf der Geltendmachung einer Vertragsverletzung oder einer außervertraglichen Pflichtverletzung beruht. Der Beitrag analysiert die Ansätze in verschiedenen europäischen Rechtsordnungen. Das französische Recht ist eindeutig: Eine deliktische Haftung ist ausgeschlossen, soweit der Schaden im Zusammenhang mit der (Nicht-)Erfüllung einer vertraglichen Pflicht steht. Das deutsche, niederländische und englische Recht nehmen den entgegengesetzten Standpunkt ein: Die deliktische Haftung ist nicht ausgeschlossen, soweit der Schaden im Zusammenhang mit der (Nicht-)Erfüllung einer vertraglichen Pflicht steht. Der Beitrag greift die historischen Entwicklungen dieser Ansätze auf und erklärt ihre Unterschiede, indem er die diesen Privatrechtssystemen zugrunde liegenden Strukturen betrachtet. Er zeigt auch, dass die Strenge beider Lösungsansätze über die Zeit hinweg, als Ergebnis richterlicher und gesetzgeberischer Einmischung, aufgeweicht wurde. Als Unterstützung für dieses Argument werden jüngste Entwicklungen der Rechtsprechung und Gesetzgebung diskutiert.Key Words: Contract, Tort, Concurrence, Non-cumul, Anspruchskonkurrenz, Samenloop Show less
The main purpose of this thesis is to explore the hypothesis that although Islamic law has its independent principles of liability, Islamic States can adopt international air carrier’s liability in... Show moreThe main purpose of this thesis is to explore the hypothesis that although Islamic law has its independent principles of liability, Islamic States can adopt international air carrier’s liability in international flights and allow the two systems to coexist in domestic flights In so doing, the work focuses mainly on the legal system of Iran.To verify the hypothesis, the author provides five chapters. Chapter 2 discusses the prevailing legal systems that are the common law and civil law that have affected the Warsaw system. A close study of the principles underlying legal liability in these two systems would in turn be very useful in gaining a better understanding of air carrier’s liability in private international law.Chapter 3 investigates the legal liability under the Shariah and Iranian law. The most important issue is the determination of liability limits for death and bodily injury, which is in contradiction with the limited liability and unlimited liability for death and bodily injury in the Warsaw-Hague regime. Chapter 4 deals with the general principles of liability that govern air carrier’s liability in international instruments. There, the author analyses these principles and compares them with the Shariah principles. The Chapter 4 argues and demonstrates that the principles of air carrier’s liability in international treaties are dynamic that continuously evolves. Therefore, States with diverse legal systems can adapt themselves to the principles of the international system. Chapter 5 concludes by highlighting that the Shariah is indeed consistent and able to co-exist with the liability principles of the Warsaw-Montreal regime. Show less
