אפריל 17, 2018
Just a month ago … a month already (time is running out), I informed you here that our office was going to be bigger. It's done for our premises since early March. It remained to find the rare pearl that would harmoniously strengthen our team.
I am pleased to introduce Karine Konko , who is now joining our firm.
Karine holds a DESS in labor law and human resources management.
She was sworn in on 1 st March 2006 and started his legal career at the Bar of the Seine-Saint-Denis.
Before joining us, she worked in several law firms, practicing mainly labor law. She will have the opportunity to support me in this matter.
Also having good knowledge in all areas of civil law, I immediately reassure my colleague from the office next door: "No, I will not buy Karine all the time!" (well, just a little bit anyway).
Of course, it was discussed with her, as some of our readers had guessed, to participate regularly in the blog. Good pick since Karine has already helped, as a lawyer, the establishment of legal content for the website of one of our colleagues in Paris, a few years ago.
It is therefore perfectly aware of the significant contribution to our business of mastering this new means of communication.
His contribution to the blog will initially turn mainly around two themes: his experience as a young lawyer in a bar such as that of Seine-Saint-Denis and a subject that she wanted to develop more specifically (few lawyers the practicing in our bar): the right of social security.
Of course, apart from writing her own articles, she will help us respond to your comments, always more numerous.
Thank you for your warm welcome and we bet you will not have to wait long to enjoy his prose.
אפריל 17, 2018
I bounce on an article recently read on the Internet following a broadcast of Paris Première during which was interviewed a "charming" Sir, owner of this site .
Just the domain name is already a whole program.
Apart from the "anecdotal" object of the site, namely "sexual revenge", the behavior of the contributors and the owner of the site, Milukman, pose the larger problem of the right to the image.
The right to the image allows any person to oppose that his image is reproduced without his authorization.
There is no text specifically governing this right, which explains a certain artistic vagueness about the notion and its applications. Its foundation has taken over time several forms. First, property rights in his image; then application of the principles of tort; finally, more modern design, attribute of the personality.
The right to the image has a controversial autonomy. It allows, indeed, to protect the honor and the reputation of the person as well as his private life. The right to respect for private life has been the subject of a text, Article 9 of the Civil Code. For some, the right to the image is also a component of the right to respect for privacy. Whenever an image of a person is published in the context of his private life, the two rights can, indeed, be confused. The distinction is therefore difficult.
The right to the image also confers economic prerogatives to the holder who can cash it or even abuse it shamefully (the examples are legion in the press people).
The owners of the right to the image can be indifferently of the individuals, who wish to preserve their anonymity, or celebrities, a part of intimacy.
In order for a person to be affected, that person must be recognizable in the photograph. If the photograph only shows details of a person, these details must be able to identify him. It is not necessary, on the other hand, that the identity of the person concerned be mentioned under the photograph. The attack is effective by fixing the image independently of its diffusion. If the subject has consented to the seizure of his image, this authorization does not relate, ipso facto, to its dissemination.
Thus, in the case of "sexual revenge", even if the subject of the image has consented to be caught in photos in undress, or even in dress Eve or Adam, his agreement is also not worth for diffusion. The subject may therefore bring legal action against the indelicate and the broadcaster images and claim damages for the damage suffered and the immediate withdrawal of the images in question from the website of the broadcaster.
אפריל 17, 2018
I noticed that many neophytes, drunk with movies and American series, constantly compare our law and our judicial system with those of the Anglo-Saxon countries. And yes, here, no "objection, your honor", copyright, jurors in the civil courts, the principle of judicial precedent …
A quick update on the English and American legal systems is needed. In future articles, I will discuss the sources of French law.
Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland) does not have a written constitution. The structural organization of the country derives from simple laws and customs.
English law is made up of legal texts (the first being the famous Magna Carta, reissued by Henry III in 1225) but above all a very important amount of jurisprudence called the common law . Unlike French law, English written laws correct and clarify the common law and not the other way around.
The common law began to emerge with the appearance of royal courts in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. It presented a very restrictive formalism, hence the emergence of a parallel system: equity, which calls upon morality to deliver justice.
on its side, for several centuries, the written law has been almost non-existent. It did not really develop until the nineteenth century.
The importance of jurisprudence in English law is linked to the principle of the judicial precedent that when a court decides a dispute, it must consider previous cases with similarities and necessarily adopt the same solution.
American law originated in the founding of English colonies subject to common law and equity.
In 1789, with the ratification of the American Constitution, was established a federal government as well as a legislative and judicial system comprising three organs: the Congress, the President and the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court interprets the laws and regulations voted by the Congress and determines their constitutionality.
In 1791, the Congress ratified ten amendments to the Constitution, including Amendment X, which provides that "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution or which are not refused by it to States shall be given to States or to citizens ".
Thus were born the governments of each state, each with its own constitution, its own senate and chamber of representatives, and its own supreme court.
The American legal system is based on English common law, which borrows from the principle of judicial precedent, the Constitution and federal laws and regulations and, to a lesser extent, the constitutions of each State and the decisions of their respective courts. jurisdictions.