About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 Bus. L. Rev. 1 (1980)

handle is hein.kluwer/blr0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Business Law Review Consultant Editor Keith Walmsley FCiS, Solicitor Editor Judy Hodgson LLB Assistant Editor Ruth Eldon Vol 1 No 1 January 1980 Registered as a Newspaper at the Post Office Subscription April-December 1980 £36 post free, inland conent Competition Competition Bill 1979 4 Profile John Flynn 6 In Perspective: Employment: A Cosmetic Approach 9 Banking Banking Act 1979 12 International Trade and Investment The New Chinese Joint Venture Law 23 Lawyers The Employed Lawyer 28 Companies Companies Bill 1979 - I 30 Around the Profession 2 City News 3 Infobank 15 In Parliament 32 American Newsletter 34 Brussels Newsletter 35 Book Reviews 36 Note: The first three issues (January to March 1980), are sent free and without obligation. ABC KAZU or C0CUTIOAS Editorial Office 9-12 Bell Yard, Temple Bar London WC2A 2JR Telephone: 01-405 6900 Subscription Office Butterworths Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent Telephone: Borough Green (0732) 884567 Advertisement Managers T. G. Scott & Son Ltd 30-32 Southampton Street London WC2E 7HR Telephone: 01-240 2032 Business Law Review The Business Law Review editorial team present this first issue and trust that readers will find this new publication both interesting and useful. The emphasis will be placed on providing practical material written by practition- ers for practitioners. As can be seen from this first issue, there will be a wide coverage of rele- vant news developments as well as more in depth feature articles. We will not be afraid to grasp the nettle of difficult conceptual problems but BLR will not dwell on theoretical issues merely for their own interest. Above all, BLR seeks to be a useful working tool for its users - to save them time and to safeguard them from missing important developments. We are well aware of the present plethora of reading matter in many fields and of the demands this makes on our readers. We do not seek to add unnecessarily to this burden but rather to highlight the issues of real practical importance and to contribute some solutions to the problems faced by those who have to implement and advise on the unending flow of new legal developments. We would welcome comments and criticisms from our readers in order that the BLR may continue to meet their changing needs, and we invite let- ters to the editor and professional news for our Around the Profession fea- ture (see p 2). Europe Some emphasis will be placed on reporting EEC legal and business news as it seems to us that business lawyers have a real need for a concise and up to date central information source which is able to deal with the technical details with which they must concern them- selves. It is to be placed on record that in Britain, lawyers have been in the fore- front of those who have a serious inter- est and involvement in EEC affairs. This is perhaps partly because one of the most tangible products of the Community has been the creation of a new body and system of law - and in this lawyers must be said to have some vested interest. The concern of lawyers is evidenced by the strong Solicitors' and Bar European Groups and in the keen interest in EEC matters shown by the Bar Association for Commerce Finance and Industry and the Law Soci- ety's Commerce and Industry Group. These bodies have done much to alert lawyers to the many implications of EEC membership though unease is shared by many business lawyers that British concerns will soon burn their fingers badly if they continue to show such apathy and naivety towards EEC rules - one thinks, for instance, of the competition rules. There are clear signs that the European Counission is becoming more aggressive in its polic- ing of EEC rules, as those who have recently been the subject of investiga- tive visits by inspectors from the Com- mission Competition Directorate can testify. It is not the place of BLR to take a pro Market or anti Market stance. We are of course solidly behind the endeavours of the British Government to seek some redress for the obvious inequities in the EEC budget and hope that that some real concessions will be forthcoming at the next meeting of the European Council. While there is a strong temptation to discount the views of other member states as mere self serving statements, there is an element of truth in certain of their arguments against the British case. For instance, France has expressed a view that Bri- tain has not taken full advantage of Community and that had she done so, the budget position would not be nearly so loaded against her. There is some truth in this view - British manufactur- ing industry has been slow to take advantage of the opportunities in Europe either because of a less than enthusiastic attitude on the part of salesmen or more fundamentally Copyright '2007 by Kluwer Law International. All rights reserved. No claim asserted to original government works.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most