Liability and Insurance in the Context of National Authorisation
The issue of liability is framed by the general framework developed at the international level by means of Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention. The mechanism most often chosen by states to deal with any international space law issues in the context of their domestic legal systems is to draft a framework law, laying down the ground rules for the licensing process whilst merely indicating the substantive obligations to be included in specific licenses, or at best outlining them. As for the liability and insurance issues, this amounts usually to insertion in the national space law or act of a principled obligation to indemnify the state comprehensively if the latter would have to pay an international liability claim under the Liability Convention, but also to allowing for case-by-case deviations from that general rule without much detailed guidance on when such partial exemptions should be admissible. Keywords: international space law; liability convention; outer space treaty
Private Entities in Outer Space Activities: Liability Regime Reconsidered
Abstract This article discusses the current state of the law concerning the liability of private entities for damages caused with respect to space activities. A significant and continuous increase in the involvement of private companies in space activities risks damages being caused to other entities as multilateral treaties of international law, adopted between 1967 and 1979, are outdated and do not correspond well with contemporary reality. They do not comprehensively regulate the responsibility in relations between states and, even more so, with private entities. In general, these treaties regulate damages caused by private entities by giving responsibility to states, which seems unfounded in today's world. States can also conclude bilateral treaties on space projects that involve private entities. Usually, such agreements contain a standard third-party liability clause concerning the Liability Convention or mention of the possibility of commencing consultations on the apportionment of the liability between states as the parties to these treaties. These have no specific norms dedicated to the liability of private launchers toward potential victims of the damage caused by space objects or another harm related to space activities of such companies. Some bilateral treaties on the joint space projects of states also contain cross-waiver liability clauses, which release private companies from liability. Furthermore, there is a tendency in the domestic law of limiting the liability of private entities for space activities (e.g., in the United States, even state regulations require the exclusion of the liability of space launch operators for damages caused to third parties).
Test security in medicolegal cases: proposed guidelines for attorneys utilizing neuropsychology practice.
In the context of forensic neuropsychological assessments, the professional interaction of law and psychology is viewed primarily as one where the retaining attorney or court dictates its needs to psychologists when resolving legal disputes. While this perspective is conceptually accurate, the positive and practical collaboration of law and psychology also relies on attorneys adhering to basic protections of sensitive psychological assessment procedures and tests. Objective testing is undermined when a practitioner of law engages in actions prior to, during, or following a neuropsychological examination in a manner that threatens the test security. An appreciation among practitioners of law and psychology regarding the necessity of test security is essential. This article reviews attorney actions that can affect test security, proposes a distinction by psychology between appropriate and problematic client preparation for a neuropsychological examination, integrates the available legal precedent regarding test security, and suggests productive measures to protect test security in medicolegal settings.