Gotowa bibliografia na temat „Non-cumulation principle”

This paper puts forward two useful methods for self-adaptation of the mutation distribution - the concepts of derandomization and cumulation. Principle shortcomings of the concept of mutative strategy parameter control and two levels of derandomization are reviewed. Basic demands on the self-adaptation of arbitrary (normal) mutation distributions are developed. Applying arbitrary, normal mutation distributions is equiv-alent to applying a general, linear problem encoding. The underlying objective of mutative strategy parameter control is roughly to favor previously selected mutation steps in the future. If this objective is pursued rigor-ously, a completely derandomized self-adaptation scheme results, which adapts arbitrary normal mutation distributions. This scheme, called covariance matrix adaptation (CMA), meets the previously stated demands. It can still be considerably improved by cumulation - utilizing an evolution path rather than single search steps. Simulations on various test functions reveal local and global search properties of the evolution strategy with and without covariance matrix adaptation. Their performances are comparable only on perfectly scaled functions. On badly scaled, non-separable functions usually a speed up factor of several orders of magnitude is ob-served. On moderately mis-scaled functions a speed up factor of three to ten can be expected.

Professional soldiers have their own social security system, separate from the general social insurance system, which provides social protection in the event of long service, total incapacity to serve and the death of the breadwinner (pension benefits). At the same time, a professional soldier can accumulate and receive two pensions from different systems, ie universal and reserve. However, the principle of accumulation of benefits based on the applicable provision is dedicated to a narrow group of entitled persons. The principle of non-cumulation is considered to be the basic and dominant one. It is an expression of the principle of risk solidarity in force in social insurance law and is not inconsistent with the constitutional principle of equality expressed in Art. 32 of the Polish Constitution. In the event of the overlapping of the right to several benefits specified in the Act, the pension authority is obliged to pay only one (higher) benefit, even if this right results from various acts, and the possibility of combining benefits must be clearly indicated in the provisions of law. Separation of the insurance and supply system allows each of these systems to fulfill separate obligations towards professional soldiers, not related to the general system. Maintaining the principle that for the same period of retirement pension insurance, two retirement benefits cannot be awarded simultaneously (Article 5 (2a) (2a) of the Pension Act). The exception to the principle of non-accumulation (ie the principle of collecting one benefit) in the case of a professional soldier remaining in service before January 2, 1999 is not determined by the date of admission to service, but the lack of the possibility to calculate the military pension taking into account the “civil” retirement age. The convergence of the right to benefits (from the general and military pension) with the parallel occurrence of these events is contrary to the constitutional principle of social justice. It is not socially just to deprive an insured person who has met the statutory requirements of the right to benefits solely on the basis of social solidarity. In such situations, a significant part of the retiree’s professional life is not reflected in the amount of received retirement benefits.

The article presents the tendency of contemporary poets to use lists and catalogues in their works in an attempt to “restore” figurative language of cumulation, which has an existentially mythological status rather than a conditionally poetic one. Historical poetics define this language as a sequence of externally dissimilar yet semantically identical phenomena stemming from archaic consciousness. Subject of the present research is the worldview specifics of Lev Rubinstein’s conceptual “Poems on Library Index Cards”, particularly, a complex of motives represented by cumulative structures. The research asserts that, in the “file cabinet” poetry, which embodies the concept of sequence with its very form, the only signified of the cumulative chain is the text prioritizing the autometadescriptive principle. Focusing on the preconditions and consequences of poetic initiation, “mechanics” of a creative act and text origins of reality, the author comes to a conclusion that a human’s life functions only through “regular writing” and lasts as long as the “file cabinet” grows. As the events are played out (the majority of works has some kind of discrete though rather defined storyline), the inevitability of death becomes more and more apparent, however, the “return” (perceived as “resurrection” in another’s consciousness) is predetermined by the possibility to reread the text as many times as one can. Thus, the way the non-classical poetry (including Rubinstein’s works) is rooted in mythological semantics not only does not exclude it focusing on the modern problems but also serves as a tool of their artistic objectification.

Abstract The complex nature of industrial design, which combines functional and aesthetic elements, allows for different modes of protection, with cumulative, separate or partially overlapping regimes applicable according to different legal systems. The legal framework is rapidly changing, especially in Europe where the principle of cumulation of a special sui generis regime for protecting industrial design with copyright rules has been established. Over the last decade, the national courts of some Member States construed the “cumulative regime” with a peculiar meaning, while other courts enforced design rights in line with the interpretation given by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The copyright/design interface is presented here to a wider, non-specialist audience, taking as a starting point the notion of industrial design derived from design studies, on the borderline between art and science. Other challenges which will need to be confronted urgently over the coming years are also raised.

The article raises the problem of Lev Rubinstein's historical poetics of writing on cards, the biographical and social reasons for his appeal to the forms of “card-file book” and catalogues. On the example of the works and public self-presentation of Rubinstein, one of the leaders of Moscow conceptualism, the author analyses the correlation of his positioning as a “deconstructor” of the repressive Soviet discourse, on the one hand, and the poetics of his works, on the other. The methodological basis of the research is works by S.N. Broitman, V.N. Toporov and V.Ya. Propp on cumulation as a principle of plot construction; by A. Yurchak and K.A. Bogdanov on the features of Soviet cultural discourse; by V.I. Tyupa on the types of artistic consciousness in the poetry of the twentieth century; by B. Dubin on the sociology of literature, etc. In the course of the study, the author determines the reasons for the writer's use of the form of a catalogue, describes Rubinstein's principles for creating a system alternative to the Soviet cultural project. Rubinstein chooses a card file as a horizontally organized space without hierarchy: at the subjective level of the poetics of the text, according to him, the roles of the writer and the reader are equalized; at the content level, the line between art and non-art is erased. The article analyses in detail the “card” poetry of the conceptualist, including texts from the archives of the Perm Museum of Contemporary Art “PERMM”, and also examines two prose books - A Whole Year. My Calendar and Cemetery with Wi-Fi. The article concludes that the position of absolute freedom declared by Rubinstein within the framework of the catalogue is not fully implemented. As the article shows, Rubinstein's texts incline towards deindividualizing consciousness, neosyncretism, cumulation and creation of structures, whose parts are subject to equalization. The levelling of differences between the roles of the reader and the writer is largely illusory: it is the the writer that sets the rules for determining the functions of the participants in the process. The role of the writer, standing outside the cards, consistently eliminating aesthetic differences between the classical and unknown writers, establishing the principles of systematization of elements, is comparable to the role of a leader in Soviet culture, and the poetics of the catalogue is typologically close to Varlam Shalamov's prose.

Subrogation is a legal right characteristically reserved by property insurers. Subrogation occurs in property insurance and in some particular cases of liability insurance. The doctrine of subrogation operates to ensure protection of certain specific principles relevant to the property insurance including the principle of indemnification whereby the compensation received is no more and no less than a full indemnity for the insured loss or damage suffered by the insured due to loss occurrence, the principle of non-cumulation in terms of claims under the same insurance contract and the principle which excludes claiming indemnity from the person who is legally responsible for causing the loss, because otherwise the insurance contract may be an unjustified source of profit for the insured as the insured would get double recovery or paid out twice for the same claim.With the payment of the reimbursement from an insurance agreement on the insurer, all rights that the insured has towards the persons responsible for the damage up to the amount of the paid compensation are transferred. With the subrogation, the insurer takes up the legal position of the insured person and exercises his right to subrogation from the rights of the insured (derivative acquisition of the right), so that the insurer exceeds the claims in scope and amount as the insured had towards the perpetrator.Subrogation is the right of the insurer, it is not his obligation. The insurer is not obliged to use this right to transfer the rights to the responsible person.The notion of subrogation is often associated with the concept of insurance regression. But there is a difference between these two terms: recourse is the right of the insurer to claim the amount of compensation that he has paid to the insured (injured parties) from the harmful person, while subrogation is the transfer of the right (the claim for damages to the responsible person) from the insured to the insurer up to the amount of the compensation paid on the basis of an insurance contract. The right to recourse is a consequence of the existence of subrogation, i.e. transfer of the rights of the insured person to the responsible person, and which is reached by the law itself.Тhe subrogation doctrine also operates to ensure that the defendant or the person who is legally responsible for the loss shall not be absolved of liability under the civil law. Namely, the perpetrator should bear the consequences of his liability for the caused damage, and therefore the legislator of the insurer (as one of the contractual parties in insurance contract) has recognized the right what he has paid the injured party (as the contractual party in the insurance contract called the insured) to calm from the perpetrator.Furthermore, subrogation doctrine operates to ensure profit for the insurance companies whereby the reimbursement funds the claims or sum insured are covered from additionally grow; therefore, this doctrine is of great importance to the insurers.

Abstract: The liability of sperm banks raises interesting questions with regard to some basic legal principles. In our opinion, sperm can be considered an object on which one can have property rights, thus leading to the possibility of an action in bailment. The Belgian law, however, differs from other countries' law in recognizing the doctrine of non-cumulation between contractual and extra-contractual liability. An additional extracontractual action can thus be questionable.

AbstractThe Berne Convention underscores the national treatment of foreign authors, allowing countries of the Union to protect designs through various means. Article 2(7) of the Convention (Berne) introduces a material reciprocity test, limiting copyright protection for works of applied art not protected in their country of origin. The Kwantum case (C-227/23), involving a dispute over a work of design or applied art, questions the application of the reciprocity test in the light of harmonised copyright law and the decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in RAAP (C-265/19). The Dutch Supreme Court seeks clarity on whether EU law mandates a copyright limitation through reciprocity, especially for non-EU right holders. In EU law, the Design Directive and Design Regulation govern the relationship between copyright and design protection for works of applied art. Both instruments stress the possibility of the cumulation of rights, allowing registered designs to qualify for copyright protection. Judicial harmonisation, notably in Cofemel (C-683/17) and Brompton Bicycle (C-833/18), extended the originality requirements to all works – including works of applied art – and thus limited EU Member States’ autonomy. The proposed Design Directive and Design Regulation maintain the cumulation principle, aligning with CJEU case-law on originality. In this Opinion, the European Copyright Society (ECS) does not make any pronouncement on the desirability of cumulation. On the topic of material reciprocity, the CJEU ruled in RAAP that Art. 8(2) of the Rental and Lending Directive (RLD) prohibited a Member State from excluding non-EEA performers from equitable remuneration for communication to the public of their recordings. The Court clarified that limitations to this right could be introduced only by the EU legislature and had to comply with Art. 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU). Any limitation had to be clearly defined by law. The Court emphasised that any exclusion of non-EEA right holders from remuneration must be explicit, as the right fell within the fundamental right to intellectual property of Art. 17(2) CFREU. Additionally, the Court stated that Art. 8(2) RLD should not be interpreted as granting a remuneration right solely to the phonogram producer and excluding the performer who contributed to the phonogram. The ECS criticised the potential wider implications of RAAP, proposing an alternative interpretation of the remuneration right under Art. 4(2) of the WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), suggesting that it should apply only to performers towards whom a direct and unreserved obligation existed on the basis of the WPPT. The ECS also criticised the Court’s reliance on the CFREU, particularly insofar as the Court viewed harmonised rights as abstract rather than individual, thus creating uncertainty about limitations. The Court’s conclusion that only the EU legislature could limit the right for nationals of non-EU states raises concerns about the application of material reciprocity by Member States in the past, and the retroactive effects of the interpretation remain unclear, contributing to legal uncertainty. In RAAP, the CJEU interpreted the WPPT, emphasising compliance with TRIPS and the Berne Convention’s core provisions in EU law. The Court stressed that material reciprocity had to be explicit in statutory law, with only the EU legislature defining limitations under harmonised rules such as Art. 8(2) RLD. However, EU design legislation grants Member States autonomy despite harmonised concepts established in cases like Cofemel and Brompton Bicycle. Unlike in RAAP, the CJEU may have more flexibility in interpreting EU copyright law for applied art in the Kwantum case. Precedents like Cofemel and Brompton Bicycle allow the Court to interpret material reciprocity under Art. 2(7) Berne without legislative intervention. Two alternatives for the Court are to interpret Art. 2(7) as mandating material reciprocity, preventing internal market issues, or to declare Member States’ application compatible with EU law, whether they apply material reciprocity or offer unreserved national treatment to works of applied art on the basis of Art. 19 Berne. Comparing RAAP and Kwantum, material reciprocity differs under Art. 4(2) WPPT and Art. 2(7) Berne. RAAP dealt with a conditional exception, while Art. 2(7) Berne is a mandatory rule, implying that countries of the Union must deny copyright protection to works protected solely as designs and models in their country of origin. While countries can choose to set aside material reciprocity under Art. 19 Berne, if the CJEU views Art. 2(7) Berne as limiting copyright as an intellectual property right under Art. 17(2) CFREU, the requirements in Art. 52(1) CFREU are already fulfilled without legislative intervention. Applying these considerations to the Kwantum case, it is noted that Dutch law provides no more protection than Art. 2(7) Berne. Given Art. 2(7)’s precedence over domestic law in the Dutch legal order, Dutch courts must apply the material reciprocity clause unless EU law dictates otherwise. In our view, the CJEU could either recognise material reciprocity as a requirement of EU law or declare Member State rules that mirror Berne’s reciprocity clause to be compatible with EU law. In conclusion, Kwantum reflects the uncertainty stemming from RAAP. The ECS advocates for a nuanced approach to the international application of EU copyright and related rights, giving due consideration to the regulations of international conventions as part of the EU legal order. In the case of copyright protection of works of applied art, the CJEU could, as a first step, either apply the reciprocity rule set out in Art. 2(7) Berne directly, or leave it to the Member States to decide on material reciprocity or national treatment, in accordance with the principles of the Berne Convention. As a second step, the EU legislature would be well advised to address the questions raised by RAAP and Kwantum at a more fundamental level through legislative intervention.

AbstractResearchers have yet to adequately identify the hierarchical structure and nature of servant leadership, and there are an excessive number of models and measures that take varying perspectives. Although the servant leadership style has been shown to be non-redundant with the dominant transformational leadership style, the lack of an understanding of its structure hinders both theoretical work and the cumulation of research findings. This study identifies the hierarchical structure of servant leadership using Goldberg’s “bass ackwards” approach on data from a survey administered to 1248 respondents that included the four principal measures of servant leadership. Our results make a theoretical contribution by highlighting the distinction between a follower orientation and a community orientation among servant leaders. Furthermore, this follower orientation can be either task-oriented or person-oriented. By identifying the hierarchical structure of servant leadership, our analysis suggests new insights into what distinguishes and drives servant leaders, thereby, contributing to this important stream of leadership research.

Cette thèse s'intéresse à l'histoire de la clause générale de responsabilité en droit français et à son impact sur les rapports entre les régimes de responsabilité délictuelle et contractuelle. La généralité de la clause entraîne sa nécessaire subsidiarité par rapport aux règles de la responsabilité contractuelle, dans un rapport qui rappelle celui entre le droit commun et le droit spécial. Il s'ensuit que la responsabilité délictuelle doit être exclue du contrat, et que cette exclusion est d'autant plus forte et définitive que l'on se rapproche du cœur du contrat et de la fonction propre de la responsabilité contractuelle, à savoir la satisfaction par équivalent du créancier lésé. Cette subsidiarité est également à l'origine de la présence de la clause générale de responsabilité tout autour du contrat, pour régir les marges du contrat, les situations para-contractuelles. Si la nature de la responsabilité dans ces marges ne sera plus débattue, ses effets devront être tempérés pour s'adapter à la présence du contrat
This thesis focuses on the history of the general liability clause in French law, and its impact on the relationship between the regimes of delictual and contractual liability. The generality of the clause leads to its necessary subsidiarity in relation to the rules governing contractual liability, in a relationship reminiscent of that between ordinary law and special law. It follows that delictual liability must be excluded from the contract, and that this exclusion becomes stronger and more definitive the nearer one gets to the heart of the contract, and to the function proper to contractual liability, that of satisfying by equivalent the injured creditor. This subsidiarity also gives rise to the presence of the general liability clause all around the contract, to govern the margins of the contract, the para-contractual situations. While the nature of liability in these margins will no longer be debated so much, its effects will have to be tempered in order to adapt to the presence of the contract