bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
comparison of palonosetron and aprepitant for prevention of post operative nausea and vomiting in females undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy under general anesthesia
Authors: Patro Girija Shankar Prasad , Kandi Sumati , Panda Bimal Krushna , Choudhury Siddhanta , Mishra Subhashree , Padhi Neha 
Published: April 2022

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is the second most common complaint following pain after surgery. In this era of daycare and outpatient-based surgery, PONV is the cause of delayed recovery and discharge from hospital settings. This study was designed to compare Palonosetron and Aprepitant for the prevention of PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy under general anesthesia. Methods: 70 patients were included in this randomized double-blind study. Each group was allocated to receive either 0.075 mg of intravenous Palonosetron or 40mg of oral Aprepitant for PONV prophylaxis. A standard regimen of general anesthesia was administered to both groups for surgery. The primary outcome was the PONV impact severity scale (PISS) score at 48 hours following surgery in both groups. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of clinically significant PONV in both groups and the requirement of rescue antiemetics. Results: Mean PISS score at 48 hours was significantly lower (0.91±0.13 vs 3.43±0.2) in the Palonosetron group than in the Aprepitant Group. Incidence of PONV (16/35 vs 33/35) was significantly lower with Palonosetron. Incidence of clinically significant PONV and requirement of rescue antiemetics was significantly lower (2/35 vs 13/35) in the Palonosetron group.
Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility: A New Sustainability Paradigm?
Authors: Bergkamp Lucas 
Published: April 2022

Summary: In this article, an important and troublesome trend of the EC's environmental and social policy is discussed. This trend is best described as a new governance model. In this new model, the government and private sector work together to make new laws (the co-operative approach), and, conversely, corporations are required to assume social responsibilities. Thus, there are two sides to this trend: public government is privatised and corporate government is publicised.
The first part of this article discusses the co-operative approach, which has become popular in the environmental area. The main reason for this approach's popularity is that it is believed to avoid the pitfalls of the adversarial approach. The second part analyses the European Commission's ideas about corporate social responsibility (CSR) as set forth in a green paper on this topic. The definition and scope of CSR, the objectives and instruments proposed by the Commission, the CSR stake-holder model, and the management structure and tools required to implement CSR are discussed. The merits of the co-operative approach and CSR are discussed in the third section. The fourth section focuses specifically on the stakeholder model on which CSR is founded. In the next section, some issues that the CSR debate has neglected are brought to the forefront. A final assessment of the co-operative approach and the CSR model is set forth in the final section.
The EU Chemicals Policy Review from a Legal Perspective: For a Progressive, Coherent and Integrated Approach that Preserves the Internal Market
Authors: Montfort Jean-Philippe 
Published: April 2022

This paper analyses the Commission White Paper on a Strategy for New Chemicals Policy from a legal perspective.
In concentrating its efforts towards resolving the “burden of the past”, the White Paper does not provide the fundamental justification of the choice of a single system applicable to both new and existing chemicals and many uncertainties remain as to the scope and functioning of this system. Ensuring the coherency of the future legislation will require clarifying the fundamental legal nature and consequences of each phase of the proposed “REACH” system, and streamlining the REACH processes on the basis of centralised, efficient, and transparent decision-making processes.
The White Paper does not specify how the Commission intends to ensure that the new legislation preserves the internal market for chemicals, another fundamental objective of the reform. This will require that the new legislation be based on Article 95 of the EU Treaty, that it clarifies some of the grey zones of the existing chemical legislation, and that the Commission effectively enforces the internal market discipline with respect to those cases where national competencies remain.
Finally, efficacy will require the prioritisation of the scope of the REACH system to avoid duplication of efforts and a fundamental reflection on the interactions between the different EU policies and legislation affecting chemicals to ensure that the future chemical legislation is integrated and coherent.
The Meaning of "Waste" in European Community Law
Authors: Salter John 
Published: April 2022

A short review ofcurrent ECJ cases on the meaninogf "Waste"; Member Stares' competence to use criminal penalties to promote compliance with Community law; the meaning of "discard" and the meaning of "disposal" and "recovery"operations for the purposes of Directive 91/156/EEC; likelihood of a wide interpretation of the term "waste".
The Leghold Trap Regulation and Potential Pitfalls During the Dutch Presidency of the EU
Authors: Harrems Nathalie 
Published: April 2022

The Netherlands acted as President of the EU for the first half of 1997. An amendment to the Leghold Trap Regulation was one of the issues on the rolling programme inherited from the previous Presidency. As the Netherlands was, at that time, the only EU Member State to have implemented the Leghold Trap Regulation, this issue was considered a particularly sensitive one for the Presidency. How it was dealt with during the Dutch Presidency is the topic of this article. It is argued that by making use of the powers granted to the EU Presidency, as well as by close co-ordination with the European Commission, the Netherlands was able to deal with the leghold trap issue in a way which satisfied national goals and needs, both from a Member State's perspective and as President.
The WTO Appellate Body In Shrimp/Turtle: Picking up the Pieces
Authors: van Calster Geert , Falconis Collegium 
Published: April 2022

The WTO Appellate Body's Report in the Shrimp/Turtle case dismisses the application by the Panel of Article XX of the GATT Agreement. A unilateral measure cannot be excluded from the application of this Article merely because of its design. GATT Article XX requires a case-by-case approach. The "related to" test of GATT Article XX(g) requires a close relationship of ends and means. The US measures at issue amount to unjustifiable discrimination, because US officials applied a rigid and unbending standard for the granting of import licences, and failed to take account of all conservation measures in the exporting countries. The US legislation was also held to lead to arbitrary discrimination on due process grounds. The Report signals the further integration of international environmental developments in free trade law.
Environmental Liability of Parent Companies and Subsidiaries under German Law
Authors: Martens Claus-Peter 
Published: April 2022

Summary: The bases of liability under German environmental law are as complex as are the addressees of liability. The responsibilities do not exclude each other but rather often apply parallel to each other. Under German civil law, the main emphasis is on the liability of the enterprise. Parallel to that, company bodies and executive employees may be held liable. Employees are liable for tortious acts committed wilfully or by gross negligence; however, they are solely liable for compensation claims vis-à-vis the enterprise but not vis-à-vis third parties. In the internal relationship between parent company and subsidiary, the parent company is always liable if the acts of the subsidiary which led to a realisation of the elements of liability were committed by order of the parent company or if another type of influence of the parent company on the acts of the subsidiary can be established. In contrast to that, liability under German criminal law, as a rule, applies as to the individual employees of the enterprise. With respect to the avoidance of liability, only a combination of various measures, such as prohibitions and the development of more self-responsibility and self-control of the enterprises, will lead to the greatest success. In particular the principles of the eco-audit should be applied in each enterprise even without an official participation in the eco-audit system.
Product Ban versus Strict Regulation: the Case of Trichloroethylene Use in Sweden and Germany
Authors: Mont Oksana , Heblich Stephan , Plepys Andrius 
Published: April 2022

The use of trichloroethylene (TCE) in the metalworking industry in Europe is regulated due to environmental, health and safety considerations and various countries apply different instruments to reduce TCE use. This paper examines two different regulatory approaches: risk management based on strict technical standards in Germany and a general ban in Sweden, which later evolved into an exemption and permit system.
Both approaches induced significant reduction of the total TCE emissions from the metalworking industry. However, in terms of emissions per value-added the rate of improvement was ten times higher in Germany, where by 2003 the emissions per value-added were 140 times lower than in Sweden. The German approach stimulated technology innovation and more sustainable businesses as well as better health and safety conditions for workers. In Sweden many larger firms totally shifted away from the use of TCE. However, some (mainly SMEs) could not find substitute to TCE and had to rely on an exemption and permit system, which allowed continuous use of decades-old equipment with relatively high emission factors. While workers’ exposure in these installations in Sweden is limited by health and safety regulations, there are few limitations for the total emissions into atmosphere.
The case illustrates that environmental risk management through strict regulations could be more effective than bans in the short run and in promoting technological innovation and higher environmental and heath and safety standards. On the other hand, the long term goals of eliminating the use of trichloroethylene is better addressed by the ban.
Revision of Environmental Guidelines
Authors: Andersen Birgitte 
Published: April 2022

On 7 July 2005, the Commission launched its State Aid Action Plan – less and better targeted state aid: a roadmap for state aid reform 2005-2009. The State Aid Action Plan outlines a reform in order to meet the goals of the Lisbon agenda and the challenges of the enlargement which took place in 2004. Part of the State Aid Action Plan is the revision of the Environmental Guidelines which expired 31 December 2007. This article studies the history and the case-law of the current Environmental Guidelines. Moreover, the public consultation undertaken for the revision of these Guidelines is discussed.
In this regard different recommendations are proposed for the future Environmental Guidelines. First of all the scope of the future Environmental Guidelines should include a definition which will protect the environment as a whole and which do not only prevent the current protections which limits itself to the prevention of “black smoke coming out of an industrial factory”. A broad definition could be limited by a more efficient economic market approach in line with the State Aid Action Plan. The key question should be whether the market is distorted by the concerned aid granted. In order to follow a more economic market approach it suggested elaborating a general scheme, a so called block exemption. With a wider definition and a general block exemption the new Environmental Guidelines may redirect its attention from reducing pollution to actively give incentives for a more effective support to deliver environmental benefits to the market.
The Chartering of Environmental Protection: Exploring the Boundaries of Environmental Protection as Human Right
Authors: Hectors Kristof 
Published: April 2022

An overlap is growing between human rights instruments and environmental protection. In the European Union the connection between those areas of law has become undeniable. The European Court of Human Rights has connected nuisances to environmental protection in Art. 8 ECHR jurisprudence, but has at the same time limited its role in Hatton and subsequent judgments. Procedural aspects of environmental protection are strictly reviewed, but the Court is reluctant to shape the substantial dimensions of environmental protection.
The recently renewed Charter of Fundamental Rights, linked to the Lisbon Treaty, adds a new dimension to the debate. The Charter certainly refreshes the discussion about the meaning of environmental protection in relation to human rights.Also, the future binding character of the Charter could strengthen the evolution towards enforceability, but this remains to be seen. The question is whether the ECJ will interpret the Charter progressively, in order to give Art. 37 (environmental protection) a procedural, as well as a substantive meaning. Also relevant, is whether the ECtHR will interpret the Charter as a signal to recontextualize its Art. 8 jurisprudence. This tension, the questions that arise,and the possible answers to it, are further explored in this article.
Copenhagen and Beyond – How to Provide the New Climate Deal with a State-of-the-Art Non-Compliance Mechanism
Authors: Hoffmann Lars 
Published: April 2022

The article discusses perspectives for designing non-compliance procedures for the new post-2012 climate-change regime. Different multilateral environmental agreements are evaluated against the backdrop of their sanctioning system whilst the discussion prominently focuses on the Kyoto Protocol’s non-compliance system – the Marrakech Accords.
According to this assessment, this blend of different approaches as it was performed within the Marrakech Accords is in line with compliance theories and practical experiences with previous multilateral environmental agreements. A combination of coercive sanctions and facilitative measures is needed where parties are demanded for meeting tight commitments. The ameliorations which are considered indispensable in view of providing the post-2012 climate change regime with an effective sanctioning system, mainly concern procedural and organizational matters as well as its legal nature.
The article pleads for a simplification of the decision-making process on determination of non-compliance, providing for a directly-triggered sanctioning process. In addition, legally binding sanctions are necessary to apply public pressure on non-complying parties. Eventually, measures that guarantee a fast reinstatement of compliance are highly favourable due to the need of mitigating the greenhouse effect.
Does the Polluter Pay? The Polluter-Pays Principle in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice
Authors: Bleeker Arne 
Published: April 2022

The principle that the “polluter should pay” has been one of the guidelines of EC environmental policy for decades. Nonetheless, a number of problems continue to stand in the way of its effective application. Most importantly, the principle itself does not define who the polluter is, what pollution is or to what extent the polluter needs to pay. This article is an assessment of the role the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has played in answering these questions. It is argued that the Court has adopted an extensive interpretation of the principle, especially in the recent Erika judgment. In that sense, the ECJ has certainly contributed to a more effective and enforceable polluter-pays principle in the EC legal order. However, the impact of the ECJ’s interpretation is of course limited by the boundaries set by EC legislation. Policies are needed to move towards a European Union in which the polluter actually does pay. Judgments can only serve to buttress and clarify such legislation.
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the three main cases in which the ECJ has been called upon to interpret the polluter-pays principle (Standley, Van de Walle and Erika). The focal point is the Erika judgment, as this is both the most recent and most far-reaching. In all three judgments, the Court emphasizes that any application of the principle has to be proportional. Polluters cannot be asked to pay for pollution damage beyond their contribution to the creation of that pollution. The Court has not shied away from defining “pollution” in a broad sense in both Van de Walle and Erika. Establishing who the “polluter” is, however, has proven far more difficult. Of particular interest is whether the producer of the product might be held liable in the case of the accidental creation of pollution, such as an environmental disaster. In the Erika case, the Court very significantly introduces a risk liability standard; product producers might be deemed “polluters” solely on the basis of their contribution to the risk of pollution. This is a significant development from Van de Walle, in which the Court considered a direct causal link or negligent behaviour necessary for product producer liability. In addition, Erika underlines that Member States cannot limit the scope of the polluter-pays principle in EC secondary legislation, even if this leads to a contradiction with a Member State’s international obligations such as the International Oil Pollution Compensation regime.
In short, the Erika judgment builds on Standley and Van de Walle but adds significant impetus to the polluter-pays principle at the EC level. However, the risk liability standard it establishes will be difficult to apply and it remains to be seen how the legislator will react to the Court’s extensive interpretation.
Channelling of Nuclear Third Party Liability towards the Operator: Is it Sustainable in a Developing Nuclear World or is there a Need for Liability of Nuclear Architects and Engineers?
Authors: Ameye Evelyne 
Published: April 2022

World-wide, almost all legal regimes transfer third party liability for nuclear accidents exclusively towards the operator of a nuclear plant. This is called “channelling” and implies that the operator of a nuclear installation is exclusively liable for damages, either legally or economically. Irrespective of their possible contribution, none of the other players – suppliers of nuclear material or fuel, transporters of nuclear material or fuel to and from the nuclear power plant, subcontractors, test operators, consultants, nuclear plant designers and constructors – bears any responsibility towards third parties in the event of a nuclear accident.
Channelling is an oddity of nuclear liability law. It deviates from the nuts and bolts of ordinary tort law provided for by both civil law and common law systems.
The present paper will not consider all above-listed players that are exempted from liability following the channelling principle, but will focus on designers and constructors.1 Indeed, the question will be examined whether, in this day and age, liability should still be exclusively channelled to the operator when a nuclear accident is partly or entirely due to design or construction faults or deficiencies.
The paper will, firstly, analyse the origin and raison d’eÃtre of the principle of channelling liability towards the nuclear power plant operator, both as regards the so-called “legal” and “economic” channelling regimes.
It will then proceed to review the sustainability of “lchannelling” in a “mature” nuclear sector, which currently faces massive technological challenges at the dawn of a nuclear renaissance. In doing so, this author will examine to which extent the most popular form of channelling – legal channelling – is sustainable in the light of recent developments in the nuclear sector or whether it would be advisable, on the contrary, to introduce liability of designers and constructors (architects-engineers) of nuclear power plants. Special attention will be paid to both the fact that nuclear energy is not an embryonic industry anymore, and that new reactor technologies are likely to alter the involvement of designers and constructors.
To accurately assess the question from a pragmatic, industry-oriented perspective, the paper considers the outcome of a consultation held on the issue with, on the one hand, nuclear power plant operators and, on the other hand, nuclear designers and constructors. Due to the limited responses to the survey, it has not been possible to draw any statistically relevant conclusions. However, the opinions of the consulted stakeholders – who all requested anonymity – have been inserted, where appropriate, throughout the body of the present paper. One should keep in mind that these inputs are not of a representative, but merely indicative nature.
SoS Back-and-Forth? Minimum v. Exhaustive Harmonization of the Right to be Protected Customers in Gas Supply Crises: Eni and Others
Authors: de Almeida Lucila 
Published: April 2022

The Russian-Ukraine gas supply crisis in January 2009 brought an unprecedented disruption for the gas supply in Europe. As a response, the SoS Regulation put in place an ambitious plan to mitigate not only the risks of another gas supply crisis, but also to protect a defined group of customers in case of unavoidable gas shortage - households, small and medium enterprises, institutions providing essential social services among others. While it was thought the SoS Regulation had pursued exhaustive harmonization standards in the definition of protected costumers, the ECJ's judgment in Eni and Others reopened the question. This article, instead, argues that the Court got it wrong. Neither the judgment nor the opinion of the Advocate General took into sufficient account the legal content Fof the provision that defined protected customers. If the Court had done so, the judgment would have likely taken additional linguistic, systemic, and teleological arguments into account. The analyses and comments on Eni and Others here offered focus on the first referred question about whether Member States could impose additional obligation on gas undertakings by reviewing the definition of protected customer.
De-Risking the Hydrogen-CCS Value Chain Through Law
Authors: O’Brien Alice , Banet Catherine 
Published: April 2022

The integration of hydrogen (H2) and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies within common value chains can contribute to the effective decarbonization of the energy system and hard-toabate sectors where electrification may not be possible or cost-effective. The H2-CCS chain is taken as an example of strategic value chains in the process towards a low carbon and increasingly integrated energy system. The successful realization of H2-CCS integrated chains requires the mobilization of vast quantities of domestic and international private capital. This article looks at how legislation and contracts, separately and in combination, can be used to manage and mitigate risks and incentivise private sector investment along the H2-CCS value chain in Europe. First, it discusses the role of national governments and the EU in developing legislative measures such as climate change targets, market design, liability regimes and how those could remove some of the risks preventing private sector investments. Second, it considers how the design and standardization of contracts can mitigate risks faced by the private sector by allocating, transferring and sharing risks between private and public parties. The article concludes that the law has an important role in de-risking investments and that further policy steps are necessary to refine the legislative and contractual regimes needed for the successful deployment of such strategic value chains.
CCS, climate change, hydrogen, de-risking, legislation, contract, risk mitigation, risk allocation, risk transfer, public-private partnerships.