Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005) but unregulated private ownership of broadcasting. This period in which concentration process made easily its way in Italy and Turkey, may also be compared to the situation in Germany where the lack of prohibition encouraged the increase of cross-ownership relations across the nation. Accordingly, the adoptation of ownership rules and the amendments made to them in the countries reviewed here, although differing in content, seem to share a common approach of accepting the degree of concentration already achieved in reality as it is and letting it remain intact. The Convention on Transfortier Television, to which Turkey is a party, does not impose any rule on ownership matters, as stressed above. Neither does the Television Without Frontiers Directive of EU, which must be taken into consideration in the procedure of membership negotiations 36 . This confirmes the survivance of national legislator’s competence in this area just like other nations concerned. The development twords more liberalization and deregulation is the common feature of Turkish media law with those of UK, Germany and Italy. If the present absence of specific restrictive ownership regulation, which occured after the 2004 decision of the Constitutional Court, continues to exist and if the government, while being silent about concentration concerns, succeds in paving way for more foreign participation, it may not be false in the near future to show Turkey as one of the most liberalised media markets in Europe. The mentioned direction of legal change, that is de jure approval of de facto emerged situation, must lead us to think about the plurality questions again and to pay more attention to the sociological assertion that views the development of media ownership rules as an illustration of law’s inclination to follow the road drawn by economic reality. Turkish experience may be seen in this context as another verification of Hoffmann-Riem’s note stating the area of media concentration as “a consummate example of the law’s limited ability to control when economic factors point in the opposite direction” 37 . This may be further detailed and considered as a contribution to the critical legal studies which critically analyze the relation between law and economy. 36 See Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Turkey’s Progress Towards Accession {COM (2004) 656 final}, Brussels, 2004, pp. 129-130. 37 Hoffmann-Riem, op.cit., p. 309. DR. SAIM UYE - PLURALITY OF OPINION VERSUS CONCENTRATION OF OWNERSHIP : RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH MEDIA LAW 135
FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005) BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS SHALL REMAIN SEPARATE LEGAL PROFESSIONS by VIKTORS URVAČOVS Abstract This Article examines the issue whether barristers and solicitors should remain as separate legal professions in United Kingdom. Barristers spend most of their time in “paper –work”, such as drafting of pleadings, complex settlements. Solicitors deal with the preparatory stages of litigation, they can appear in most courts and tribunals. These two professions are very different, though have something in common. The Article will help to understand the nature of differences between these two professions, mention Royal Commission’s report on this issue, and use comparison as well experience of other countries to prove the statement. INTRODUCTION A distinctive feature of English legal system is the division of the legal profession into two separate branches – solicitors and barristers. 1 In other parts of the world all practitioners are described as “lawyers” – this word has no particular application in United Kingdom. The field which in other countries has been occupied by people having legal education, in United Kingdom is occupied by representatives of two separate legal professions. I will develop the following points: historically these two professions have evolved as separate ones, report of Royal Commission supports the status quo, practitioners perform similar tasks and face similar problems, though these professions differ heavily. I will look at this issue from Latvian perspective, mention personal experience and examine statutes of UK concerning particular issue. In conclusion I will mention that this is a unique system, which had shown its indispensability, proved the effectiveness of its applicability in practice, and still has huge capacities for the development. The division of legal professions dates back to about 1340, the time at which professional advocacy evolved. 2 The separation of the historical profession has an historical foundation. The separation of pleaders and attorneys was a natural separation of different skills between quick-witted and learned courtroom lawyers and managerial, clearky lawyers. 3 This suggestion was made by Coke in the seventeenth century. 4 The same distinction between specialists and generally practitioners was reproduced mush later by barristers and solicitors. 5 The nature of functions which they perform has also emerged from the past: barristers are still primary advocates, though spend most of their time in “paper-work”, such as drafting of pleadings, complex settlements and opinions in specialized matters such as taxation and company law. 6 Solicitors deal with the preparatory stages of litigation such as the preparation of evidence, interviewing witnesses, issuing writs. They have right of appearance in most courts and tribunals. Solicitors deal with large number of non-litigation matters such as the drafting of wills, supervision of trusts and settlements, 1 R. Walker, The English Legal System (Butterworths, 1985) at 248. 2 J. H. Baker,” An Introduction to English Legal History (2 nd edition)” in R. Walker (ed.), The English Legal System (Butterworths, 1985) at 248. 3 J. H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History (3 rd edition) (Butterworths, 1990) at 179. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. 6 Note 1. Supra at 249. VIKTORS URVAČOVS - BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS SHALL REMAIN SEPARATE LEGAL PROFESSIONS 137
Page 1 and 2:
FREE LAW JOURNAL IN THIS ISSUE : Vo
Page 3 and 4:
FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
INTRODUCTION FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOL
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
2. PARTICULAR ISSUES FREE LAW JOURN
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
entitlement to national participati
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Free Law Journal - Volume 1, Number
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Issues Relating to Law of the Sea F
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
FREE WORLD PUBLISHING Inc. HTTP://W
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
y FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMB
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80: FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
Page 129: FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
show all

Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?