bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The Genius of Old Romance
Authors: Moore Helen 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
In 1803 two new translations of Amadis were published: from French, by W. S. Rose, and from Spanish, by Robert Southey. It was through Southey’s editions of Amadis and Palmerin (1807), another Spanish romance, that Keats, Coleridge, Mary Shelley, and Hazlitt gained their knowledge of the genre. This chapter undertakes the first detailed consideration of Southey’s Amadis and demonstrates that it was heavily dependent upon Anthony Munday’s translation, to an extent not perceived at the time by the critics who praised Southey’s seemingly authentic Elizabethan diction. The translations of Southey and Rose were treated to a detailed assessment by Sir Walter Scott in the Edinburgh Review (1803) and exerted a considerable influence on Scott’s knowledge of medieval literary history and on his novels. The central themes of this chapter are the Romantic preoccupation with the medieval and Elizabethan periods, historical authenticity, and the recreation of the literary past.
Urban Environments as a Framework to Study Parallel Evolution
Authors: Santangelo James S. , Miles Lindsay S. , Breitbart Sophie T. , Murray-Stoker David , Rivkin L. Ruth , Johnson Marc T. J. , Ness Rob W. 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
Urban environments represent globally replicated, large-scale disturbances to the landscape, providing an ideal opportunity to study parallel evolution in natural populations on a large scale. In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of studies investigating evolutionary responses of a diverse range of taxa across multiple cities. Although parallel evolutionary responses across independent urban environments will depend on the extent to which urban environments converge on similar biotic and abiotic environments, the extent to which cities are environmentally similar has not yet fully been integrated into studies of urban evolution. This chapter begins by asking: Do species display parallel evolutionary responses across independent urban environments? It then briefly reviews a subset of the environmental factors that have driven parallel responses to cities (heat islands, pollution, and habitat fragmentation) and discusses some of the potential causes of non-parallelism. Finally, it ends with practical considerations for the design of future studies aiming to examine parallel evolutionary responses to urbanization. Understanding the shared and unique features of urban environments and identifying parallel species responses to rapid and ongoing urban development will provide important insight into the ubiquity of parallel evolution in nature.
Evolutionary Dynamics of Metacommunities in Urbanized Landscapes
Authors: Brans Kristien I. , Govaert Lynn , Meester Luc De 
Published: June 2020

AbstractAs urbanization leads to repeated, marked environmental gradients in space, it provides an ideal ‘natural’ experiment to study how evolving metacommunities, in which evolutionary and community ecological processes interact in a landscape context, respond to anthropogenic disturbances. An integrated approach that combines community data with data on genetic responses of focal taxa to urbanization is still lacking, notwithstanding the likely importance of eco-evolutionary feedbacks on urban ecosystem functions and services. Such a joint analysis is most easily achieved by focusing on shifts in trait values and their interspecific (cf. community ecology) and intraspecific components. The latter involves both non-genetic and genetic responses, and should be quantified for all dominant, abundant, or ecologically important species in the (meta)community. This chapter introduces the evolving metacommunity framework and discusses the use of cities to study how this framework can contribute to our insight into population and community responses to anthropogenic change. It discusses how this framework can enhance our capacity to predict responses to contemporary and future urbanization as well as its possible consequences for ecosystem functioning. It predicts that evolutionary trait change contributes substantially to observed trait shifts at the community level. Conversely, genetic adaptation might often be constrained by rapid changes in species composition. It explores eco-evolutionary partitioning metrics that quantify the evolutionary and ecological contributions to responses to urbanization. Finally, it provides guidelines for experimental studies on urban evolving metacommunities, and suggests directions on research that will build towards a fully integrated evolving metacommunity framework addressing biological responses to urbanization.
Introduction
Authors: Zglinski Jan 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This introductory chapter sets out the themes of the book. Doctrines of judicial deference have begun to appear with growing regularity in the European Court of Justice’s free movement case law, especially in relation to Member State action. Their application has been controversial, which is unsurprising in light of the constitutional issues which deference raises: should judges intervene in the work of the legislators? How far can the EU restrict national autonomy? And what is the division of power between European and Member State courts? The chapter sketches the approach taken in the book and explains the empirical study on which the analysis is based. The idea of the ‘passive virtues’ is introduced and linked to the developments in EU free movement law.
The Rise of Deference
Authors: Zglinski Jan 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter presents a macro-level analysis of the phenomenon of judicial deference in free movement law. It focuses on two questions: how frequently does the European Court of Justice defer to national authorities? Has its intensity of review of Member State action changed over time? A systematic analysis of free movement jurisprudence reveals that deference to domestic institutions has increased since the 1970s, a development which challenges some common beliefs about the Court of Justice and free movement law. The chapter looks at possible reasons for this evolution, arguing that it is connected to broader legal, political, and institutional changes that have taken place in the EU.
Accountability for EU Peacebuilding Missions
Authors: Moser Carolyn 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter offers a brief introduction to accountability in the context of the EU’s peacebuilding activities. It first sketches out the institutional and operational scope of EU civilian crisis management (ie peacebuilding activities under the CSDP) and then unveils the central problématique of the book, namely that EU peacebuilding realities no longer correspond to the codified intergovernmental blueprint, so that missions take place in a Europeanized set-up. This de jure–de facto discrepancy, in turn, raises governance issues. From here, the chapter shows, based on insights from peacebuilding practice, that dysfunctional accountability arrangements are not an isolated phenomenon but constitute a common thread across EU civilian crisis management. It argues that the intricate Europeanized governance set-up of civilian CSDP facilitates an accountability deficit. Prior to outlining the structure of the book, the chapter explains how this interdisciplinary study of accountability in civilian CSDP enriches the existing corpus of academic literature.
The Mutual Judicial Influence of National Courts and the European Court of Justice through the Preliminary Rulings Mechanism
Authors: de Búrca Gráinne 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
Taking the moment of imminent UK exit from the European Union as an opportunity to reflect on the mutual influence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the English courts, this chapter examines the 113 preliminary references made by the higher English courts over a 10-year period to investigate two related questions. These are: first, the extent to which the CJEU’s rulings have been implemented by the British courts, and second, the extent to which the interpretations proposed by the UK courts may have influenced the CJEU. On the first question, the chapter’s findings indicate that it is very difficult to assess the extent to which the preliminary rulings of the CJEU were implemented by the referring UK courts, given the remarkable lack of information available about what happens following a preliminary ruling of the Luxembourg Court. On the second question, the chapter’s findings suggest that in the substantial number of cases in which the British courts advanced a proposed interpretation of EU law, the CJEU adopted that interpretation in a majority of those cases. Hence, even though the CJEU has rarely acknowledged the influence of national referring courts on its rulings, the cases referred from the higher UK courts over the past decade suggest that instead of a one-way relationship in which British courts were subject to the overriding authority of the CJEU, there was a process of mutual influence in which the Luxembourg court more often than not adopted the interpretation of EU law proposed by the British court.
Legislating and Adjudicating
Authors: Sharpston Eleanor 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
The chapter examines the role played by the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) in ruling authoritatively on the meaning of European Union legislation. The EU legislative process differs from the parliamentary process in the United Kingdom for good reason. Within the European Union, there are many different traditions of how such drafting should be done; whilst, at EU level, multinationalism and multilingualism have a significant impact on what emerges as the final text. The chapter explains the difficulties encountered and gives illustrations from the Court’s case-law of instances where the Court has either decided not to take steps that might be construed as ‘legislating’ or, conversely, has gone to the limits of ‘constructive re-interpretation’. The chapter concludes by asking how far the Court should ‘bend’ a legislative text.
Challenges of Multilevel Constitutionalism
Authors: Saunders Cheryl 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter deals with multilevel government as one of the significant themes of Paul Craig’s work. Its focus is multilevel government within the state, defined to include a range of forms of significantly devolved government, of which federation is one. The chapter responds to the apparent paradox that while multilevel government is now widely regarded as a desirable feature of a system of government, for many good reasons that include its potential to deepen democracy, multilevel systems tend to become increasingly centralised over time, detracting from the advantages they offer. The chapter suggests that a partial explanation lies in prevailing conceptions of constitutionalism, almost all of which were developed by reference to the assumptions of a unitary state. It argues instead for a concept of constitutionalism adapted to the objectives and circumstances of multilevel government, in a compound form that might be described as multilevel constitutionalism. Multilevel constitutionalism would not dictate the degree of devolution but it would support its adoption and operation once in place. Implementation of multilevel constitutionalism in turn demands cultural change on the part of the principal actors, to give it practical effect. The chapter explores what this might require of political elites in pursuing intergovernmental arrangements, and of courts, interpreting and applying the governing constitution. It concludes with still tentative suggestions about the extent to which a suitably modified version of multilevel constitutionalism could apply above the level of the state, to regional and international arrangements.
A Hard Law Approach to States Systemic Violations of Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union
Authors: Maduro Miguel Poiares , Queiroz Benedita Menezes 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
The rule of law is under threat in the European Union. Systemic violations of fundamental rights are affecting the rule of law, democracy, and judicial independence in some Member States and consequently the EU legal order. The level of interdependence between the Member States and the EU legal order is such that systemic violations of those principles in the Member States end up impacting on EU compliance with the same principles. Article 7 TEU did not prove, however, to be the most effective tool to face these problems due to its political nature. The EU’s intervention in the form of infringement actions to safeguard the rule of law at the national level may be a suitable action to address some these serious violations of fundamental rights. Despite of the earlier hesitation to take a bolder action in this regard, the EU Commission, after the Court of Justice’s recent decisions in Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portuguese and LM, brought infringement proceedings against Poland challenging this country reforms that put into question the independence of its judiciary. The Court established its power of judicial review over the rule of law in the Member States in C-619/18 Commission v Poland. Ultimately, this decision highlighted the role of EU law in safeguarding the rule of law in its Member States, but more importantly in safeguarding the rule of law in the EU legal order as a whole.
The Disposition of Movable Cultural Heritage
Authors: Gerstenblith Patty 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
Recent conflicts throughout the Middle East and North Africa illustrate that the bifurcation in the international legal regime between those instruments that apply to armed conflict and those that apply to the movement of cultural objects, primarily during peacetime, has severely hampered our ability to protect archaeological sites from looting and has necessitated several sui generis legal instruments, including three UN Security Council resolutions. In addition, questions sometimes arise as to whom and to where cultural objects should be returned following situations of armed conflict and occupation, highlighting a tension between territorial principles that determine a sovereign State’s authority over cultural objects found within its territory and the strong cultural connection that links minority or excluded groups with disputed heritage objects. This chapter thereby points out two areas in which intersections are lacking—the intersection between instruments that regulate armed conflict and those that regulate international movement of cultural objects, and the intersection between cultural heritage law and human rights law. The chapter proposes that if these disparate sources of law could be integrated, more effective protection could be given to cultural heritage during armed conflict and there would be movement toward harmonization of rights of minority groups to cultural heritage and of States within the framework of international law.
Developments Concerning Immunity from Seizure for Cultural State Property on Loan
Authors: van Woudenberg Nout 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter examines recent developments supporting a recently emerging rule of customary international law that cultural objects belonging to foreign States and on temporary loan for an exhibition are immune from seizure. It assesses, in particular, the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, a declaration on jurisdictional immunities of State-owned cultural property in the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of the Council of Europe, a Draft Convention by the International Law Association on immunity from suit and seizure for all cultural property on loan, as well as legal developments in the United States, Europe, and Australia. These developments strengthen the existence of the rule of customary international law on immunity from seizure for cultural State property on loan, though they also confirm certain exceptions to that rule, namely that the rule does not extend to those cultural objects which have been the subject of a serious breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law, or which are already subject to return obligations under international or European law.
Nationalism Versus Internationalism
Authors: Peters Robert 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
Within the debate of nationalism versus internationalism, this chapter describes the development of international cultural heritage law, analyzes the notions and concepts used in this context, and highlights the existing shortcomings and loopholes in national and international legal frameworks in this field. First, the chapter explores the concept of a World Heritage Trust, and argues that the procedure used to designate World Heritage sites has become a national contest between States to obtain as many designations as possible, rather than the international and non-partisan procedure intended. Second, the chapter addresses the issue of trafficking in movable cultural heritage, by arguing that an exclusive focus on patrimony and national export laws (nationalism) is unidimensional and insufficient to protect movable cultural heritage from trafficking. In contrast, the mutual recognition of export laws through export and import regulations is a much more comprehensive and truly international approach (internationalism). In view of recent developments at the national level in Germany, as well as at EU level, the chapter demonstrates coordination between export and import regulations is necessary to protect cultural heritage against destruction and trafficking.
The Right to Erasure in Practice
Authors: Ausloos Jef 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This final chapter takes a practical approach, looking at challenges to accommodating the right to erasure and how to resolve them. Indeed, assuming the right to erasure applies (see Part I), and that a fair balance can be drawn (see Part II), the right still needs to be operationalized on the ground. This chapter roughly has two main parts. The first one identifies and evaluates the key hurdles to operationalizing data subject empowerment in the information society services context. This is done by pinpointing complexities, describing the results of empirical research testing data subject rights, and a critical appraisal of potential abuses of the right to erasure. It is concluded that in practice, the right to object will often be much more realistic and effective in empowering data subjects. Secondly, the chapter lists the key requirements for effective data subject empowerment. It does so by building on all the previous chapters and the practical evaluation in the previous section. Effectuating data empowerment—and the fundamental right to data protection (Art 8 Charter)—does not solely hinge on the GDPR, but requires a holistic approach considering other legal frameworks as well. Technical tools and reshuffled incentive structures for dominant market players will also prove fundamental in rendering data empowerment effective.
The Civil Online Court in England
Authors: Briggs Michael 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter traces the history of the development of the civil online court, from its origins in reports from the Civil Justice Council and Justice, from overseas trailblazers such as Rechtwijzer in the Netherlands and the Civil Resolution Tribunal in British Columbia, to its adoption by the Court Service’s Reform Programme. It argues that if the key elements of automated triage and discontinuous online communication are designed and rolled out successfully then, with suitable entirely new procedure rules, the online court should be able to play a critical role in enabling litigants to bring and defend small civil claims, with limited assistance from lawyers, at a cost which is not, as at present, wholly disproportionate to the value at risk. The early public testing of the first stage of the online court suggests that it is well on the way to fulfilling that ambition. The chapter also describes some of the risks and challenges facing the online court, such as the need for assistance for those who find digital working challenging, the need to maintain open justice, and the need for lawyers to change their working practices by unbundling so as to be able to make the focused contribution to the process, by early bespoke advice on the merits and advocacy skills in the few cases which need a traditional trial.
Does Procedural Mean Trans-substantive? A Historical and Normative Analysis of English Civil Procedure Rules
Authors: Crifo Carla 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
One of the outcomes of the Judicature Acts’ reforms of English civil litigation in the nineteenth century was the separation of ‘substance’ from ‘procedure’, by introducing rules of court that were expected to apply trans-substantively, in contrast to the previous forms of action. This was not an express central aim of the reformers, who may also have been influenced by the then concurrent creation of the American system of federal courts and their civil procedure. The chapter identifies the historical, philosophical, and ideological buttresses of the trans-substantive nature of procedural rules in the English legal system, and how trans-substantivity itself differs from the cognate values of generality and uniformity. It then explores whether any one of these concepts is still used, or useful, in English civil procedure.
Reciprocity and Just Conduct in War
Authors: Renic Neil C. 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter locates the role of reciprocal risk within the Just War Tradition. This begins with the ‘conventionalist’ account of the moral right to kill. The chapter then considers the most recent challenge to this position in the form of Just War ‘revisionism’. Following this, it will examine the more consequentialist approach of ‘contractarianism’. The chapter will demonstrate that within all three of these approaches, an assumption of war as a site of reciprocal structural risk plays an essential role in the permissiveness of inter-combatant violence. The chapter then explores the tension between the coherence of these justifications and conditions of radical asymmetry.
Dualism
Authors: Eleftheriadis Pavlos 
Published: June 2020

Abstract
This chapter discusses the general relationship of EU law with domestic law. The positivist account of law produces two paradoxical accounts of EU law. The first account is the theory of European ‘monism’, supposing that the EU is the foundation of all law in the member states. The second is ‘radical pluralism’ which says that there are no legal rules applying to the relations between EU law and domestic law. They are both mistaken, because they are both based on a picture of law as a hierarchy or ‘system’ of rules created by a formal doctrine of legal validity. Under the positivist view, inspired by Kelsen and Hart, all legal ‘systems’ must compete for supremacy of their ‘basic norm’ or ‘rule of recognition’. In this sense EU law must compete with domestic law. Legal positivism is false and must be rejected. Dualism, by contrast, relies on the rival theory of law which says that law is a matter of substantive moral judgment. It has no need for a single ‘ultimate’ rule or fact at its foundation. In this analysis, domestic law and international law do not compete because they apply to distinct political questions. The first is an answer to the problems of jurisdiction and the second is the answer to the relations among states. Dualism is the best legal interpretation of the relations between EU law and domestic law.