Matrimonial property regimes in the EU Hola, Hi everybody!! Could sb be so kind and help me out with this? Thank you in advance :) Btw, I would be glad to help you with Spanish!! Even though the European Union is not competent to regulate the substantive law in civil matters, in order to avoid legal uncertainty of the European Union spouses, and previous agreement of the Members States, a European optional matrimonial property regime could be proposed by the European Union to the Member States. The present study tries to look for the best matrimonial property regime that ideally will comply with the goals contained in three approaches. First, the best matrimonial property regime for the protection of the weaker party. Second, the best in terms of better adaptation and application amongst MS. Third, the best to achieve equal treatment between the spouses. This work demonstrates that the community of property regime is still a tendency amongst the property relationships between the European Union spouses, however, since the family models have evolved from a patriarchal model to a rather dual-earner family model, it is necessary that the European Union proposes a regime which promotes both, the spouse’s economic independence and solidarity between them. It appears proven by this study, that a participation regime, more precisely the deferred community regime, could comply with such aims because during the marriage the separation of property governs the marital property relationships and then, when the marriage comes to an end, possible unfair economic situations are mitigated with the creation of a community of property which is deemed to be equally shared, 50 % - 50 %, between the spouses. Once, determined which regime seems more convenient to be proposed, it will be assessed whether this regime comply with the goals determined in the above-mentioned three approaches.

conclusion paper Thank you for your help :D Concerning the last part of the research, it seems clear that unlike traditional arbitration, electronic arbitration saves time and cost. And since it accelerates the arbitration process, electronic arbitration I think should be developed in aviation dispute settlement. At the same time, I think this kind of arbitration implies new requirements for arbitrors. It is necessary that arbitrors apart from being experts in air law have the sufficient technological knowledge required to gain the confidence of the parties to the dispute and promote the recourse to such systems to settle their differences. And of course, electronic arbitration may face certain problems like security. For this reason, I consider it is necessary to reach an even more development of IT because it is essential to provide secure connections and websites.

final part essay Thank you a lot for the correction!! The “return of the state” apart from the economic field, it might take place as well in security issues since states can proceed on a discretional basis. As Alvarez mentions this is the case of states, which in name of national protection might do what it is not explicitly forbidden and have discretion respect to even such well-established regimes as those regarding military occupation. But even in this case, we have to make a distinction as the author does, depending on the geographical standpoint of the state at issue. If we talk about military intervention, from the author’s point of view, it could have been as a way of showing self-governance and sovereign defense of its citizens. This could be the case of the United States and its allies in 2003 with the military intervention which had the aim to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction in the name of national and, to one extend, international security. On the opposite, from the Iraqi position, it suggests that state sovereignty have declined as the state was no longer able to ensure the protection of their civilians in the bombings. Indeed, the worldwide acceptance of humanitarian intervention indicates that the Westphalian sovereignty is in decline and may be considered an outdated concept. This is because respect for state sovereignty has been overshadowed by the growing conviction that there are principles which all states should follow as far as individuals’ human rights are concerned. This is based on the belief that the inherent rights of an individual are morally superior to the state’s sovereignty so that humanitarian intervention might take place. States, which defend that state sovereignty always trumps, even in humanitarian emergencies, as I see it, have a wrong conception since the sovereignty of a state should not stand higher than fundamental human rights. What is more, in a globalized word, states do not just care about its own citizens, but also they try to make respect human rights of individuals in general; they do not take into account its borders limitations but people’s human rights (or at least is one of the arguments they use for humanitarian intervention).

Discussion note Thank you for correcting me!! I really appreciate and please feel free to ask for help in Spanish or Catalan. In the first part of this chapter the author stresses different point of view of scholars and two positions are clear: globalist and statist. However, it seems generally acknowledged that anyone will take one or other extreme because both proposals expose just a difference of degree in a continuation. Thus, from one hand, we find scholars or international lawyers who adopt a merely descriptive position of the current sovereignty conception called either descriptive statist or descriptive globalist. And on the other hand, we find authors who describe either one or other situation and claim their desire to change the way it is: normative statist or normative globalists. After reading the Alvarez’ text one can say that he takes an implicit normative assumption since from the very begging, he stresses that we have a Westphalian system. However, through the text he underlines that there has been a rather global system and points out that states’ sovereignty is not in decline since there are states that found in the old-fashioned Wesphalian model answers to the democratic and legitimacy deficits of the current International Institutions. For this reason, he describes and acknowledges a reality, we live in a globalized world that interacts through international institutions, but since the current system does not work anymore they, including him, manifest their desire to change the way it is and go back to the wesphalian conception of sovereignty. As the author, I do not think that the sovereignty of the states is withering totally away but I would rather believe that States had agreed to adapt their sovereignty to the new globalized society and this tendency still taking place in different fields.

Première expérience au volant Je suis en train d'apprendre à conduire et je voudrai vous partager ma première expérience. Il y a deux semaines que j'ai passées mon examen théorique et j'ai déjà fait huit heures au volant. Pour le moment c'est difficile pour moi être coordonnée et parfois je suis fatigué parce que je dois me réveiller à bonne heure pour conduire pendant une heure et après aller à l'Université. Le problème c'est quand mon professor n'a pas la sufficient patience avec moi. En plus, Barcelone est une cité avec beaucoup de voitures et donc la situation est un peu difficile avec les conductors impatients. Bon, je souhaite vous raconter en un mois si j'ai amélioré. Je serai ravie si vos partages avec moi votre expérience quand vous avez appris à conduire. Merci.