Search results for: "IF" (3032 results)
take customary international law in the wrong direction, diminishing its value to states as a mechanism to address common problems (terrible food). If
prices with little fear of compet- itor entry. The high price may not attract entry at all if potential rivals under- 3. See Pac. Bell Tel. Co. v
insider violates the rule only if she uses material inside information in her decision to trade, and I consider how this “use” standard changes the
but in a different way: Does the sign affect how people ought to behave? If it does, how and why? What are the normative upshots of the fact that the
two offenses are defined by different jurisdictions,3 they cannot constitute the “same offense.” This is true even if the offenses contain identical
The high price may not attract entry at all if potential rivals understand that the monopoly can take advantage of the safe harbor to drive them from
other rules to guide the agent’s decision. If agents are biased but otherwise share preferences with the principal—and the principal knows the
these precautions would amount to negligence since the costs of these measures are lower than the expected harm (7 < 10).1 Therefore, if the injurer’s
rights under CEDAW.10 If an individual does not have victim standing, however, the CEDAW Committee will find that individual’s communication
if the government would still enact a given policy in the face of substantial additional enactment costs, the probability that the policy serves