Professor Arkadiusz Wudarski, European University Viadrina and University of Zielona Góra

I spent two months (July–August 2017) as an academic visitor at the IECL, financially supported by my home university, European University Viadrina, under the B/ORDERS IN MOTION programme.

It was a very productive time which gave me a good start on a research project concerning digital inheritance. My research is of a comparative nature, involving dogmatic analysis of legal systems of selected European countries with special focus on doctrine and judicial practice in the UK. As it happens, this topic has recently received some attention in the UK. While I was at Oxford, the Law Commission of England & Wales published a consultation document concerning wills which included a short section on digital assets.

During my stay at the IECL, I tried to find answers to some fundamental questions related to this topic. Do a deceased person’s successors inherit online accounts along with their digital content (images, text files, databases, blogs, social media profiles)? Do close family members have the right to read personal e-mails of the deceased, maintain their blogs or use their online accounts? Does access to such sensitive data threaten the interest of third parties protected by law, and should it therefore be limited? Do successors inherit all rights and obligations of the deceased resulting from contracts concluded with Internet providers such as Facebook, Google, Xing or Twitter? What type of property are digital assets? Are they inheritable, and if so, under what conditions? Answers to these questions form a comprehensive area of study which involves not only the law of succession, but also constitutional law, property law, contract law, IT law, intellectual property law, data protection law, and private international law.

To have the opportunity to conduct this research at Oxford was a real pleasure. First of all, it is impossible to overestimate the significance of access to the impressive library system. A huge collection of resources on common law provided me with valuable material for comparative legal study. The resources available at the Bodleian Library induced me to extend my field of study to include American law.

Apart from enabling a highly efficient literature search, my stay at Oxford has also enriched me as an academic. It gave me an insight into university life in the UK which was stimulating both scientifically and socially. I was invited to All Souls College to take part in the conference “Counting Votes and Weighing Opinions – Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective”, where along with engaging in an interesting discussion I could establish contact with top British and European lawmakers. Visiting a crown court in Oxford and taking part in court hearings was another informative experience.

Last but not least, I should mention weekly coffee break meetings at the IECL. Drinking tea in an international environment, exchanging comments on the English weather, listening to Oxford tales and trying to understand the British sense of humour added even more colour to my already fascinating stay in Oxford. Oxford University is a unique place and a delight for any researcher. It was a wonderful feeling to be part of the local academic community, even if only for a short time. Here I would like to express my thanks to John Cartwright, Birke Häcker and Jenny Dix for their hospitality, support and assistance. It would be a great pleasure to come here again.


Dorine Verheij, Leiden University

From mid-May to mid-June, I had the honour of being an Academic Visitor at the Institute of European and Comparative Law.

During my research stay, I have investigated the liability of credit rating agencies under English tort law and the interpretation of the European Regulation on credit rating agencies under English law. The research that I have conducted in Oxford will form part of my dissertation on European tort law and the liability of credit rating agencies in particular, which I hope to finish in 2019.

My time in Oxford allowed me to investigate the common law system thoroughly, to discuss my findings with other academics and to gather valuable resources from the Bodleian Library. Being an academic with a civil law background, my research stay contributed enormously to my understanding of the common law system.

The IECL brings together dedicated academics from all over the world, making the IECL an inspiring place to work. The atmosphere at the IECL is very friendly and open, especially also during the great discussions in the Comparative Law Discussion Group. I owe many thanks to John Cartwright for providing me with this tremendous opportunity and for discussing my research. Furthermore, I would like to thank Jenny Dix for all her assistance before and during my time at the IECL. Finally, I am very grateful for all the wonderful people I have met at the IECL. At the moment of writing this report, I am conducting research in Paris and it is my pleasure to write that I will meet again with two former colleagues of the IECL.


Professor Isaac Martín Delgado, University of Castilla-La Mancha

The worst thing about writing a report on the activities developed as an academic visitor at the Institute of European and Comparative Law is that it means that you are no longer a visitor … Moreover, confining what I write in this very intensive period of my live (I spent a whole year at Oxford University, from July 2016 to July 2017, together with my family) is an impossible mission.

Plenty of activities about many different topics to choose from: the Comparative Law Group seminars to learn about research carried out by IECL members and visitors; working meetings with colleagues to discuss my research work; very stimulating Friday coffees talking about such diverse things and sharing experiences … To sum up, just the ideal of the University environment lived together with very interesting people from many European countries.

In my case, I concentrated my research in finding, studying and deeply analysing techniques, mechanisms and procedures to transpose European Directives in order to evaluate the possibility of importing them into the Spanish legal system and to make concrete proposals to review the way in which Directives are enforced in my country. In fact, Spain is usually in the first places of the ranking of countries that fail to fulfil their obligations under EU Law and, after the Lisbon Treaty, failing to communicate measures that fully transpose the provisions of Directives allows to the ECJ to impose penalties to the country concerned. A very practical theme.

Additionally, the fact of arriving to the UK some days after the referendum for leaving or remaining within the European Union allowed me the possibility to follow closer the evolution of the political and legal events about Brexit and to open a new research line on the subject.

The really impressive Oxford University databases and libraries, the very interesting seminars regularly organised by the European Union Law Discussion group, the possibility to discuss the first results of my research with some of the best experts in the world like Professor Paul Craig and the general environment to conduct research (everything inspires you to think, study and write in Oxford) made this year not only a very productive one in terms of publications, but also an unforgettable experience for all my live.

Last, but not least (not least because they are the soul of the Institute), I would like to mention two persons that have supported me during my stay: Professor John Cartwright and Jenny Dix. Both of them have really help me to feel the Institute like home. The way in which they understand the University and the day-to-day life at the IECL has inspired me in my role as a Director of the European Studies Centre of the University of Castilla-La Mancha, my University. My gratitude to them.

It is true: Oxford is a different world and it is not possible to imitate Oxford style without colleges and the general environment of the city outside it; but we can try to put into practice some of the teachings derived from our experience there. That is what being a member of the University community means.


Professor César Cierco, Lleida University

From my personal experience, I understand that the Institute of European and Comparative Law (IECL) offers an ideal framework in which to carry out legal research. In this Institute, I was able to complete my research on the regulation of public vaccination, incorporate valuable elements of comparative law and open up new lines of thought in this respect.

First, I would like to highlight the resources that the IECL, through the University of Oxford, makes available to researchers, allowing them to access a broad series of data sources, in addition to the bibliographical resources of the various libraries linked to the University. When, as in my case, comparison with the legal architecture of other countries - outside the sphere of Civil Law - is important, this circumstance is obviously decisive.

Together with this, the IECL makes a real effort to promote the development of research projects starting from an exchange of views and a comparison of ideas with specialists from the University of Oxford. The work of Professor John Cartwright, Director of the IECL, was essential here. I was struck by his interest in the subject and the lines of my work, and the speed with which he put me in contact with professors who, in his opinion - which turned out to be correct - could provide me with elements and reflections of interest.

There is a third aspect which could apparently appear to be minor but which, in practice, tends to play an important role for the successful outcome of the research: the context. The IECL has excellent facilities, in the Faculty of Law itself and, above all, encourages the creation of a friendly working environment in which there is space for researchers to share ideas. To this end, everyone tends to highlight the opportunity of the mid-morning Friday tea-time as the occasion to share impressions and take an interest in the concerns of others. However, in general, everything makes it easy for the researchers - who have come from different places around the world, with diverse fields of research, and with distinctive profiles - to engage in productive dialogue. In this respect, it is only right to stress the work of Jenny Dix who, in her capacity as Administrator, is also another pillar of the IECL, since she acts as an effective connecting link between all the members.

Finally, all the above is crowned by the special attraction offered by Oxford and its capacity to inspire. It is undoubtedly difficult not to be carried away by the academic sensation that radiates from every nook and cranny of Oxford.

To summarize, the Institute of European and Comparative Law is a highly recommended place in which to carry out research, and also to become immersed in a different way of understanding and of experiencing University. In short, it is a good place for a university professor to broaden their mind and internalize the universal meaning of this vocation in a more effective manner.


Viktoria H.S.E. Robertson, Assistant Professor, University of Graz

I was a Visiting Fellow with the Institute from September 2016 to August 2017, during which time I was also associated with the Institute’s Centre for Competition Law and Policy (CCLP). During my time in Oxford, I carried out extensive research for my book project on the topic of antitrust market definition in innovative market environments. As this is a comparative law research project, the Institute was the ideal setting for me – having both a strong emphasis on comparative law as well as a world-renowned centre exclusively dedicated to competition law. The well-equipped Law Bod as well as the stimulating research environment at the Institute were highly beneficial to my work throughout the year, and I am leaving Oxford with a feeling of gratitude, satisfaction and curiosity of what might come next.

The Institute’s regular Comparative Law Discussion Group allowed for lively discussions on a wide-ranging array of comparative law topics. In May 2017, I was given the opportunity to speak about comparative law methodologies in competition law research within that discussion group. That same month, the CCLP organized a very timely event on Online Markets and Offline Welfare Effects which I was glad to attend. Finally, in June 2017, I had the privilege to speak at the annual Antitrust Enforcement Symposium organized by the CCLP, an enormously stimulating event bringing together academics, enforcers and practitioners for a weekend of lively debate against the beautiful backdrop of Pembroke College. Throughout the academic year, I also attended a great number of other thought-provoking discussion groups and conferences, as well as some undergraduate lectures and graduate seminars in competition law. I was fortunate to be able to discuss my research with a range of highly knowledgeable individuals (whom I refrain from naming for fear of leaving somebody out), and these frank discussions certainly enriched my work.

During my research stay, I was admitted as a temporary member to the Senior Common Room of St John’s College, Oxford, and for this I am particularly indebted to my former college tutor, Simon Whittaker. Senior Common Room membership gave me the wonderful opportunity to re-experience college life and the stimulating academic discussions that come with it. The Encaenia ceremony was another highlight of my academic year.

I would like to say a heartfelt thank you to Ariel Ezrachi for hosting me at the CCLP, and to John Cartwright and Jenny Dix for hosting me at the Institute, for what turned out to be not only a memorable but also a highly productive research year during which many friendships were forged and possible future collaborations explored.


Elisabeth Brameshuber, Assistant Professor, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business

In May and June 2017, I spent seven tremendously productive weeks at IECL, generously financed by my home institution, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business. During my visit, I mainly concentrated on finishing my research on the ‘Information and Consultation Framework Directive’ (ICFD) 2002/14/EC. This research forms part of an edited book on EU Collective Labour Law (editors: Beryl ter Haar, University of Leiden, and Attila Kun, Karoli Gaspar University Budapest), to be published in 2018 with Edward Elgar Publishing. The main idea of the book and therefore also of my chapter is to combine an overview over the different topics with insights into recent research questions in the relevant fields. Coming from Austria, where information and consultation at the workplace plays a very important role in the labour relations in general, my stay in Oxford helped a lot in understanding why regulation at EU-level was and still is difficult.

Most helpful was the possibility to present the first results of my research to the Labour Law Discussion Group. Discussing the underlying systematic differences in employee-involvement in the UK and in Austria with some of the most well-known experts in that field (especially Hugh Collins, Mark Freedland and Jeremias Prassl) showed me once more that common standards at EU-level in collective labour law matters are most difficult to achieve. One of the outcomes of my research is that information and consultation (I&C) ‘only’ at the stage as established by Art 4(4)e) ICFD, thus in case the employer intends to substantially change work organisation and contractual relations, is not going to have the effects envisaged by the ICFD. Effective I&C thus has to take place at an earlier stage, or rather permanently and not only in order to discuss social implications after economic and strategic choices have been made. As best-practice examples of certain Member States, but also of negotiated agreements in various countries, show, permanent I&C is not inconceivable. Recent developments show that even in countries without strong employee involvement-traditions, such as in the UK, there is a call for more extensive employee involvement.

The environment at IECL was the perfect place to conduct comparative research on that topic. Thanks to John Cartwright, Jenny Dix and all my wonderful temporary colleagues at IECL (in particular Elisabeth Ahlinder, Vicky Robertson, Nadja Schwery, Karina Tata and Elbert de Jong) I felt most welcome and ‘at home’ from the very beginning. Working together with motivated researchers from all over Europe was truly inspiring. Conducting research in such an open and welcoming environment offered many new perspectives, not only on labour law, but also on how I would like to pursue my academic career in the future. Thanks to Jeremias Prassl, I also got to know other academic visitors to Oxford in the field of labour law (Desmond Ryan from Trinity College, Dublin, and Tess Hardy from the University of Melbourne) which shows that the environment is truly international. To conclude, I am most grateful that I had the possibility to work at IECL and to live in Oxford for two months, spending many hours doing research, but also building friendships and bases for future academic collaborations.


Associate Professor Alexander Molotnikov, Law Faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University

One of my lines of research addresses the issue of corporate law and financial markets. My research visit to the University of Orford Institute of European and Comparative Law gave me the opportunity to write an article “The Fourth Industrial Revolution and contemporary understanding of corporate forms of business dealing”. This article presents the history of industrial revolutions and possible influence of the fourth industrial revolution on the sphere of legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity. The article is already published in the second issue of the magazine Business Law. The second article on the independent directors in Russia is coming soon.

The opportunity to attend the library and discussions with professors of Oxford University was of great value for me. In particular, I would like to say thank you to Paul Davies, Luca Enriques, John Armour and other professors with whom I've met during my visit to the Institute of European and Comparative Law. I would also like to express special gratitude to the Drector of IECL, John Cartwright, and the Administrator, Jenny Dix. Thanks to their efforts, we extend co-operation between Moscow State University and the University of Oxford!

 

 


Dr Miguel Ángel Martínez-Gijón Machuca, University of Sevilla

UK Labour Law is well known within the realm of EU Law because of its interesting contributions to the topic on discrimination. As I am in the process of writing a book on disability discrimination in Labour Law, my visit to the IECL was absolutely necessary and fruitful. I stayed from the beginning of January 2017 till the end of February 2017, focussing on two main points: first, the knowledge of domestic disability discrimination law; second, the recent developments in the concept of EU disability.

The IECL provided me with a very suitable environment for both working effectively and meeting many interesting professors, lecturers and researchers. The latter helped me deepen my insights into their countries´ respective jurisdictions. I also met Professor Anne Davies, an expert on EU Labour Law, whom I would like to thank for her support and orientations.  

Mornings and afternoons in the library were very fruitful, allowing me to acquaint myself with the English jurisdiction, particularly from the view point of disability. In fact, I was able to draw on numerous books and articles tailored to this topic. Interestingly, even prior to the enactment of the Directive 2000/78, the UK had already ruled on reasonable workplace adjustments, considering them a compulsory duty towards employees. The American influence is clear on this approach and the UK has been the gate to enter these mainstreams into the EU Directive.

According to the European Court´s perspective, the concept of disability was to exclude mere illness, but, following the Ring and Kaltotf cases, it has actually been widened. Now, chronic illnesses and other permanent impairments, like obesity, are included. Fortunately, the law library contains a special section on European Union monographs and journals, all of which were very useful to become updated on these sort of issues.

Among the large variety of events organised by the University of Oxford, I attended the Labour Law Group talks. This allowed me to gain an insight into several topics, such as the procurement and workers' rights, the difference between Common Law and Labour Law or the difficulties of implementing Courts' judgements in practice.

I hope that my book on the ending of an employment contract for the sake of illness will be finished in due course. I am particularly grateful to Professor Cartwright, IECL Director, and Jenny Dix, Administrator, for their guidance and assistance during my stay at the IECL.


Dr Andrea Edenharter, University of Regensburg

I was a postdoctoral Academic Visitor at the Institute from September to December 2016. The main focus of my research was the protection of fundamental rights in multilevel systems, which is the topic of my habilitation thesis. I analyzed the approach British courts have taken towards the doctrine of supremacy of EU law, with a special focus on recent developments, in particular the High Court decision in R (Miller and Dos Santos) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. In addition, I examined perspectives from legal theory on the EU and its relationship with national law, considering monist, dualist and pluralist approaches.

I was lucky enough to discuss questions related to my research on EU law with various scholars, in particular with Professor Pavlos Eleftheriadis, whose seminar on Constitutional Principles of the EU I attended. Moreover, I had the opportunity to discuss issues related to the protection of fundamental rights with Professor Anthony Bradley, who not only shed light on the role of the ECHR in the UK, but also shared with me his insights into the legal implications of the Brexit debate. Last but not least, I was able to participate at the meetings of the EU Law Discussion Group, which gave me the chance to meet researchers and experts from all over the world.

In addition to my research on fundamental rights, I dedicated some time on a topic that I had covered from a German perspective before: the rights of religious employers when it comes to imposing lifestyle-related obligations on their employees. Whereas in Germany, the right to self-determination allows religious organisations to impose lifestyle-related obligations on their employees in an extensive manner, the situation in the UK is quite different. Since in the UK, antidiscrimination legislation has a long tradition, religious organisations enjoy less discretion with regard to ethos-based measures against employees. For the purpose of my research, I had the chance to meet Professor Lucy Vickers who recently published a monograph on this matter and to discuss with her similarities and differences of the German and UK systems. In addition, I am indebted to P. James Campbell SJ whose insights shed a light on the general situation of religious organizations in the UK. The results of my research will shortly be published in an article.

Last but not least I wish to thank Professor John Cartwright and Jenny Dix for their assistance during my stay at the Institute. I would also like to thank my colleagues at the Institute for their support and their readiness to discuss questions related to European Union law.


Dr Inés Sánchez-Ventura Morer, University of Navarra

I arrived at the Institute on the 1May 2016 for a postdoctoral research stay of five months. My research focuses on European consumer contract law: unfair terms. The United Kingdom has recently unified through the Consumer Rights Act 2015, most of its domestic legislation in consumer contract law. Until 2015, the consumer protection regime was extremely complex and fragmented. Most of the statutes implemented European Directives. Special mention should be made of the rules related to unfair terms in consumer contracts. Before the Consumer Rights Act 2015, we could find two regimes regulating unfair terms: Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 applied to exemption clauses in consumer and non-consumer contracts, and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 which implemented the Directive 93/13/CEE of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts. As a result there was some overlap between the two regulations. the Consumer Rights Act 2015 has unified these two regimes that coexisted for 20 years. Since 2015, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 is not applied to consumer contracts.  

The subject matter of my research was the role of the transparency principle and its connection with the duty of disclosure of information that is due by the seller or supplier to the consumer. The rule of 2015 has introduced new requirements in relation to this principle. As a result of this research I have done a comparative study between the English and the Spanish system.

I have taken into account the principles of English Contract law, the great influence that European Union has had in domestic legislation and the criteria the European Court of Justice has developed to assist judges in interpreting the different principles and concepts Directive 93/13/CEE introduced.

The IECL provides a friendly atmosphere that allows a continuous exchange of opinions. At the Institute I have had the opportunity to meet researchers from all over Europe. Especially through the meetings the IECL organises every Friday where we have a chance to meet not only visitors but also fellows and professors from the University of Oxford.


Dr Pernilla Leviner, University of Stockholm

(Stockholm Senior Visiting Fellow, 2015-16)

I was blessed with being able to take a sabbatical at the IECL during the first half of 2016, generously financed by the Faculty of Law, Stockholm University as part of the Oxford-Stockholm Collaboration.

My main focus was a project in family law concerning children’s rights to participation and the role and function of legal representatives in child protection cases. I compared the Swedish system with that in England and Wales, and there the specific framework with tandem representation for children. As part of this project – and also inspired by comparing the two systems - I have begun addressing the concept of consent and autonomy for vulnerable groups such as parents and children in child protection proceedings.

In Oxford I was able to discuss questions relating to my research with many scholars at the Institute as well as at both the Faculty of Law and other faculties at the University. I am particularly indebted to Professors Jonathan Herring, John Eekelaar, Mavis Maclean and Lucinda Ferguson. It was a privilege to participate in the Children’s and Family Law Discussion Group at the Faculty of Law – where I held a seminar on the Swedish ban on physical punishment – and also attend events organised by the Oxford Children’s Rights Network. I am also very grateful for the possibility to observe proceedings in Family Courts and meet with both social workers and lawyers working in the field. This was made possible by the generous help and network of colleagues at the Institute and the Faculty.

As often happens when addressing a different legal system in that very practical way, I was inspired to write about other topics such as adoption and surrogacy arrangements, both of which demonstrate significant differences in comparisons of the legislation in England and Wales to Sweden.

The time spent at Oxford gave a lot of input and inspiration but also some output ;-). Apart from having started working on a book on participation and legal representation for children I have also finalised a couple of articles on these topics. I am very grateful for having had the possibility of a sabbatical in Oxford. The research environment at the IECL is very inspiring and I greatly enjoyed the Friday coffee meetings. I was also lucky to be an associate member of Exeter College which gave me the opportunity to experience the very special and friendly atmosphere of Oxford college and also meet with so many inspiring researchers from many different fields of science.


Dr Raúl Lafuente, University of Alicante

In January 2014 I joined the Institute of European and Comparative Law as Academic visitor. Since them, I have visited the Institute three times for the purpose of carrying out research work. 

My research project has focused on international successions and the conflict of laws, aiming to identify the differences between Common law and Civil law systems, and the practical problems arising in determining the Court's jurisdiction and the applicable law after the entry into force of the European Union Successions Regulation, specially for the successions of British nationals with habitual residence in Spain. The research carried out during this time has been very productive and highly rewarding and the access to the bibliographical funds of the Bodleian Law Library has been essential in order to conduct and develop my research. As a result, I have published several articles related to international successions, testamentary trusts, and the conflict of laws. 

My research periods at the Institute have also been a good opportunity to attend the numerous academic activities organised by the University of Oxford, and have provided me with the possibility to meet other colleagues not only from Oxford University but also from other countries around the world which are working on research projects linked up with my research topic. The research environment provided by the IECL is fantastic and represents a unique and exceptional opportunity for carrying out research work. Therefore, I wish to express my gratitude to the Governance of the Institute for having been admitted as Visitor, specially to John Cartwright, Alexandra Braun and Jenny Dix for their assistance, help and advice during my visits at the Institute. I would also like to thank all my colleagues for their support and friendship. It has been a pleasure working with them and sharing coffees and lunches in Oxford.


Professor Fernando Llano-Alonso, University of Seville

My research topic at the Institute of European and Comparative Law concerned the General Principles of the European Union, particularly focusing on the Principle of Subsidiarity from a legal-theoretical perspective, and also taking a hermeneutical approach to its vague meaning. According to this principle, which was established in the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht and nowadays is contained within the proposed new Treaty of Lisbon, the European Union may only act and make laws where member states agree that the action of individual countries is insufficient. In other words, this Principle is extremely important because it underlies everything the European Union does in areas where it does not have the right of exclusive competence. This also means that the Community must not undertake or regulate what can be managed or regulated more efficiently at national or regional levels. This is not only one of the central principles in the EU context, but a principle inherent in any construction of a federal type, and must be exercised in a spirit of cooperation between the various levels of power.

Notwithstanding the brief duration of my research visit, from July to August 2016, it was very productive since I was able to write an article to be published in 2017.

I should also like to say how pleased I am to have had the opportunity to meet colleagues from other countries and exchange views and knowledge on Comparative Law. The academic environment at the IECL was perfect to develop my research successfully, therefore I would like to finish by thanking Prof. John Cartwright for his support, and for giving me the opportunity to visit the Institute, and Jenny Dix for her generous availability at any time and professionalism in responding to my queries.


Professor Amalia Diurni, University of Rome Tor Vergata

The initial idea to come to Oxford for my research project was to focus on the "History and current issues of English and Scottish Law in a comparative prospective" as I was preparing a new edition of my European Comparative Law Textbook.

Facing a new editorial challenge, as soon as I joined the Institute I realised the potential of developing the original project towards new topics such as the study of the Financial Collateral Arrangements from a comparative prospective. Security interests are a branch of financial law concerning the creation and transfer of financial assets. Each legal system underpinning the functioning of financial markets across the globe is different, even though substantial progress has been made to harmonize the various jurisdictions. In particular the 2002 EU Directive on financial collateral arrangements had the objective to introduce common standards across Europe and reduce the gap with the US to increase market efficiency and stability. The aim of my research was to understand if these objectives have been achieved. As a result, during my stay I focused on the English and Scottish rules on this subject compared to some other European legal systems (Italy, France, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Spain and Portugal). Since Europe compares with its major law making competitors such as the US, and with the soft law products (ISDA's and European Master Agreements, DCFR, International Conventions etc.) my study aimed at providing a comparative assessment of the interaction between the various components and jurisdictions in a dynamic perspective.

The environment here in Oxford was ideal for my research objectives: I cannot thank enough John Cartwright, Jenny Dix and all my colleagues at the Institute for their enthusiasm and support. Moreover, the volume of documentation available on-line is so vast and comprehensive to largely offset the inconvenience caused by the refurbishment of the Bodleian Law Library.

I have also had the extraordinary opportunity to witness the historic event of the EU referendum from inside. The shocking decision of the UK to leave the EU tells us how important peace, integration and joint responsibility are. These objectives can only be achieved through relentless commitment, in particular from those who are in charge of culture and education as we are.

I leave with sorrow my colleagues and many new friends. I sincerely hope there will be another opportunity to come back to the Institute and perhaps see its new location in 2017.


Professor Vanessa Mak, Tilburg University

My research visit to the Oxford Institute of European and Comparative Law in May-June 2016 was brief, but fruitful. My main aim was to work on a few chapters that will become part of a monograph on lawmaking in European private law from a legal pluralist perspective. The research project focuses on mechanisms for ‘managing pluralism’ in European private law. It explores ways in which norms developed at different levels of regulation—national law, EU law and transnational private law—can be coordinated within the broader social and market framework of the EU. Where existing strategies for lawmaking, in particular top-down harmonization by the EU, seem to have reached their limits, new mechanisms emerge or can be conceived. The project explores the normative basis and the regulatory design of such new mechanisms, focusing in particular on private or hybrid forms of regulation, such as standardization in contract law, and the development of guidelines of regulation that might benefit lawmaking actors (legislators, but sometimes also courts or tribunals).

I used the time in Oxford to discuss research ideas with scholars based at several of the Oxford colleges, who kindly hosted me. Their company was very engaging and our discussions contributed much to developing my research. I also had the chance to attend one or two lectures by prominent visiting scholars.

Without overstating it, the research environment provided by the IECL is amongst the best in the world. The resources of the university, for my research primarily available through the Bodleian Law Library, are comprehensive and easily accessible. Furthermore, the workspace provided by the Institute during my stay—even if it was at a different location due to refurbishments—was excellent and the staff extremely helpful and welcoming. Having been at Oxford before, it is always a pleasure to come back and I hope to have the opportunity to do so in the future, not least to see the Institute at its new location in the St Cross Building.


Dr Laura Carlson, Stockholm University

My visit at the Institute the spring of 2016 was of a dual nature: to participate in an Erasmus plus teacher mobility program and also to research. The Erasmus teacher exchange between the Law Faculty at Oxford University and the Department of Law at Stockholm University has entailed that a fellow at the Institute, Andreas von Goldbeck, was co-course director of Comparative Law in Stockholm in the fall of 2015. Now in the spring of 2016, I had the opportunity to participate as a teacher in the international labour law course, doctoral seminars and a moot court. The establishment of the teacher exchange is seen as a further strengthening of the ties between the Department of Law at Stockholm University and the Institute. The research I did while at the Institute was for an ongoing project, Grappling with Democracy: Trade Unions, Representation and the Law, which I began as a research fellow at the Institute the year prior. The specific topic, labour union members’ rights to concretely influence the actions of the labour unions internally, is being examined from a comparative perspective of Sweden, the US, and the UK. The stay at the Institute afforded me the opportunity to further research the UK labour law model.


Dr Laura Alascio, University of Pompeu Fabra

One of my lines of research addresses the issue of Inheritance Contracts in Catalan and Spanish Law, and their role as an alternative to wills when organising one’s succession. Indeed, in an inheritance contract, the future decedent and the future heir agree so as to create a right in favour of the latter to the future estate of the former. The basic consequence is that the future decedent is prevented from appointing a new heir through a will and, in turn, the future heir is barred from disclaiming the inheritance. The resort to this type of contract poses many issues and, in particular the reasons that drive a person to relinquish their freedom to make a will. Traditionally it is understood that the reason underlying this decision was to urge the future heir to do something in particular (namely, take care of a member of the family or tend the family business) knowing that, in doing so, he would be rewarded in the future with the bequeathing of the estate. Developing this line of research, during my stay at the Institute, I delved into the comparative analysis of the topic and consider its implications by analysing deeper how common-law systems address this issue, and, at an European level, how do substantive regulations of comparative legal systems interact with the Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession. The results of the research will be shortly published in the forthcoming book Los pactos sucesorios en el Derecho civil catalán, by Editorial Atelier.


Dr George Gerapetritis, University of Athens

The research project I worked on during my stay at the Institute was about new economic constitutionalism. It focused on the institutional mutation of constitutionalism following the major economic crisis in the Eurozone and globally. The idea is that there has been a historical evolution from constitutionalism to economic constitutionalism (constitution abstaining from setting constraints on the economy) and to new economic constitutionalism (constitution positively giving priority to the economic provisions over structural and human rights provisions). New economic constitutionalism was triggered by institutional default, caused due to over-reliance on market principles and mutual sincere cooperation among the European Union institutions and to over-reliance on the dialectic between European solidarity and national responsibilities. The implications stemming thereof are both instrumental upon drafting and reading of the Constitution and institutional upon governance. Accordingly, it is suggested that fresh vehicles relating to the structure of government, the decision-making process and in the formation of the policy agendas need to be set in place to address the challenges of new economic constitutionalism, for the conventional instruments of constitutionalism (legitimacy, accountability, separation of powers, rule of law) do not suffice. The above theme was presented in a series of lectures and seminars at the University of Oxford, the University of London and the Queen’s University Belfast. It will be published as a book in 2017.


Dr John Hopkins, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

During the period October-December 2015 I was fortunate enough to be a Canterbury Fellow at the Institute of European and Comparative Law at the University of Oxford. During this time I undertook work on a number of projects including work for a series of the entries for the forthcoming Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law. The Fellowship also allowed me to develop connections with a number of established and world leading scholars, many of whom hosted me in their Colleges. I am extremely grateful for their assistance and hospitality. I was a regular attendee at both the International Law and Comparative/European Law seminar series and in some cases developed (and re-kindled) contacts with a number of globally recognised scholars and practitioners from outside Oxford. Overall I found the experience extremely fruitful both academically and personally. The facilities were second to none and the assistance provided by the Institute and University staff was exemplary. The Institute of European and Comparative Law could not have been more helpful in providing both a friendly place to work and an intellectually stimulating environment. I hope that the contacts developed there (from as far away as Chile and Sweden) will provide the basis for further collaborations in the future.