Location, Location, Location

Location, Location, Location is a Channel 4 property programme, presented by Kirstie Allsopp and Phil Spencer and produced by IWC Media, part of the RDF Media Group. The reality show follows Allsopp and Spencer as they try to find the perfect home for a different set of buyers each week. It first aired in May 2000.
The 2007 series had a major revamp. The opening titles logo was changed and the format of the show altered. Instead of only one couple per week looking for a house in a town, two couples with different tastes look for a house in the same city with the presenters going back and forth to the different househunters. Each episode was extended to 60 minutes from the original 30. The first episode featured Glasgow and the second Sheffield.
Title of the show.
A cliché used by property experts is that the three most important factors in determining the desirability of a property are "location, location, location". This tricolon appears in print as early as 1926, though it is often incorrectly attributed to the real estate magnate Harold Samuel.
Relocation, Relocation.
Relocation, Relocation is a Channel 4 property show based on the same format as its parent show. Each week a couple look to buy a house, usually outside large urban areas, and also invest in a house or shop in the city, with the help of Kirstie and Phil. The series usually airs in the winter months, so as not to coincide with "Location, Location, Location". "Relocation, Relocation" was cancelled in 2011 due to economic conditions making it difficult for people to buy one house, let alone two. Repeats are frequently shown on More4.
"Relocation, Relocation" has also been dubbed in Italian and broadcast in Italy by Lei with the name "Cambio Casa (Finalmente!)".
An Australian version of the show, titled "Relocation Relocation Australia", began in 2011.
Location, Location, Location: 20 Years and Counting.
The 20th anniversary of the series called was aired on 27 August 2020.


Seagoing cowboys

Seagoing cowboys is a term used for men and ships used from 1945 to 1947 for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration and the Brethren Service Committee of the Church of the Brethren that sent livestock to war-torn countries. These seagoing cowboys made about 360 trips on 73 different ships. Most of the ships were converted World War II cargo ships with added cages and horse stalls. The "Heifers for Relief project" was started by the Church of the Brethren in 1942; in 1953 this became Heifer International. In the wake of the destruction caused by the Second World War, the historical peace churches in the United States (Church of the Brethren, the Society of Friends or "Quakers," and the Mennonites) sponsored relief missions to war-ravaged Europe, typically in cooperation with the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). These relief missions usually took the form of transporting farm animals (such as heifers or horses), by transatlantic ship, to Poland and other countries where much of the livestock had been killed in the war. The men who tended the animals aboard these boats were called seagoing cowboys. These ships moved horses, heifers, and mules as well as chicks, rabbits, and goats. Ten seagoing cowboys died on the when it sank after accidental grounding in the Gulf of Finland on December 25, 1947.
The Seagoing cowboys delivered to: Albania, China, Czechoslovakia (unloading in Bremen, Germany), Ethiopia, Greece, Italy, Poland, and Yugoslavia (unloading in Trieste, Italy). A total of 239,377 hoofed animals were transported. Over 7,000 men from the United States and Canada enlisted to be seagoing cowboys. Some 366 seagoing cowboys were from the Civilian Public Service.
Heifer International.
"Heifer International", an organization founded by a member of the Church of the Brethren, mirrors those war relief programs by continuing, in the 21st century, to operate international relief missions that promote sustainable community agriculture by giving heifers and other farm animals to help people around the world. The organization encourages recipients to "pass on the gift," so that recipients become donors once the animal they receive produces offspring.
Exhibit and conferences.
On May 10, 2010 some surviving Seagoing Cowboys came to Funderburg Library at Manchester College in North Manchester, Indiana for the dedication of the permanent Seagoing Cowboys exhibit put on by the Dan West and Heifer International.
A sixtieth anniversary conference commemorating and studying the historical significance of the seagoing cowboys in these relief efforts from 1946 through 1948 was held August 12–14, 2005, at the Church of the Brethren Service Center in New Windsor, Maryland.
From the 60th anniversary Seagoing Cowboys conference: "From 1946-48, more than 4,000 cows passed through the town of Union Bridge, Maryland on their way to the port of Baltimore where they were loaded onto liberty ships for Europe. The 'seagoing cowboys' who accompanied and cared for these animals came from farms across America. They had one goal in mind: to provide a continuous supply of milk to the children and their families of war-torn Europe by replenishing their lost livestock. This effort was known as Heifer Relief."
One of the cowboys was the future scientist Owen Gingerich.


Potters For Peace

Potters for Peace is a nonprofit organization that has created a network of potters and other relevant parties to improve quality of life and preserve tradition using local skills and materials. PFP primarily works in Central America and has headquarters in Boulder, Colorado. PFP manages projects that help local potters to improve and market their products. PFP is best known for their work in water treatment, which has influenced water treatment systems worldwide. The treatment strategy follows a Point-of-Use (POU) water treatment design that uses ceramic water filters to remove pathogens and other contaminants from the water. This is generally a very effective method to remove bacteria from water, though there are some concerns about the ease of use and maintenance of the filtration units. Unlike other similar organizations, PFP does not manufacture these filters, but instead helps local communities to set up independent filter workshops to produce and sell the filters.
Mission.
Potters for Peace is clear to assert itself as an assistance organization, rather than an aid-based organization. Instead of simply solving the problem, PFP aims to provide sustainable solutions propelled by the goals of the individuals they work with.
According to the Potters for Peace website, "Our goals are to offer support, solidarity and friendship to developing world potters; assist with appropriate technologies sustained using local skills and materials; help preserve cultural traditions; and assist in marketing locally, regionally and internationally".
History.
Potters for Peace got its start in 1986 when a group of potters led by Mary Chapman and Dolly Pomerleau of the Quixote Center in Washington DC traveled to Nicaragua. The potters met with a female pottery/canning cooperative. This led to the first PFP fundraiser in Washington, DC. The program began to gain momentum after the Nicaraguan civil war to help pottery cooperatives. In 1988, the first contact in Nicaragua was made. A year later Steve Earp and Ron Rivera were sent. Ron Rivera helped make tenmoku glazed ceramics for electrical transmission lines. Over the next decade, PFP grew in size, finally receiving 501(c) (3) non-profit status in 1999 in the US. PFP later obtained non-governmental organization status in Nicaragua.
The best known PFP project, ceramic water filters, was begun when in 1998 Hurricane Mitch struck Central America. A filter workshop was set up in 1999. This workshop developed into an independent business that has implemented more than 40,000 filters in collaboration with several NGOs. PFP takes pride in the fact that it does not operate any filter workshops, but instead trains local potters to produce and distribute the filters.
Potters Without Borders.
Potters Without Borders registered as a Non-Profit society in British Columbia, Canada in 2006 is the sister organization of Potters For Peace and works on projects together with PFP. PWB is based in Enderby, British Columbia, Canada with offices in Clare, Nova Scotia and Ningming, Guangxi, China.
Projects.
PFP has been active with several programs in Nicaragua since 1989. These programs emphasize the mission of PFP to help local potters succeed in their own right. Many of these projects center around helping potters market their products locally and abroad (PFP help organized an 18,000 piece sale to Pier 1 from a Nicaraguan cooperative, though this may have had negative long-term results) or use their skills to create new products that solve a local issue.
Potters Teaching Potters.
The goals of the Potters Teaching Potters project is to share skills and knowledge about pottery. It allows campesina potters to travel in their country and abroad by providing transportation and expenses. Additionally, PFP finances scholarships for apprenticeships and holds conferences that bring together both Nicaraguan potters and also international buyers which help potters learn how to market their products abroad.
Technical and Design Assistance.
As part of the Technical and Design Assistance program, Potters for Peace give access to necessary tools along with training on items such as energy-efficient kilns. Pottery designs are constantly being refined to fit the needs of their customers.
Fuel Efficient Kilns.
The Fuel Efficient Kiln project was begun when volunteer Manny Hernandez designed a kiln that uses 50% less firewood to fire pottery. These kilns, called "Mani" kilns, have been built worldwide, totaling at least 60 so far.
Alternative Fuel Burners.
Along with helping potters with starting up their practices, PFP helps maintain this profession by utilizing agricultural and construction waste as fuel for firing pottery as part of the Alternative Fuel Burners project. As firewood becomes more and more expensive, PFP keeps sustainability at the forefront of their projects by pushing for alternative and local fuels.
Ceramic Raw Materials Research.
Potters for Peace has a materials research facility in Nicaragua where different combinations of ceramics are tested for their different properties for the Ceramic Raw Materials Research project. Also, PFP pays some of its potters to do their own materials research.
Marketing.
Pieces made by these local potters are marketed in several ways. PFP developed a system of road signs that alert people to the availability of pottery. Funding is given for these potters to attend artisan fairs, where they show their wares and make connections.
Ceramic Water Purifiers.
The manufacturing process is quite simple. A press forms the pot shape out of clay mixed with rice husks. The pot is fired, and the husk burns, leaving small holes that the water can run through. Finally the filters are coated with colloidal silver. The filters are used with plastic storage units to collect the water.
The efficacy of the PFP filter has been assessed by several independent organizations. It is reported to remove up to 99.9% of fecal coliform under laboratory conditions; however, this removal rate can vary greatly under usage in the field
Efficacy of the CPW filters also depends on the flow rates through the filter. Lower flow rates have led to disuse of the filter. It is found that a filter manufactured with a clay to sawdust volume fraction of 1:1 was found optimal for field use. An elaborate study illustrated that the flow rate through the 1:1 CPW followed a hyperbolic relationship with time. This study also discussed the relationship between flow rate from the CPW filters and quantity of materials (Clay and Sawdust) used in the manufacture of the filters.
The long-term sustainability of CPWs has also been assessed. It has been found that the CPWs have a disuse rate of 2% per month, with 67% of this disuse resulting from filter breakage. This leads to a mean usage lifetime of 2 years. This may or may not be appropriate for a given situation. The strength of the ceramic water filter materials as a function on clay and organic materials like sawdust, ash etc. have been performed. Economics and supply chain would have to be assessed before considered CWPs as a solution to a water problem. Comparative cost analysis, efficacy and operation effectiveness of low cost clay-based water filters has been extensively reviewed, but results are difficult to generalize due to variability in the materials and recipes used.


Stephen Gaetz

Stephen Gaetz , is the director of the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness (COH) and a professor at the Faculty of Education at York University in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Gaetz has enhanced pan-Canadian collaboration between stakeholders interested in homelessness research in Canada.
He was the Chair of the Organizing Committee of the Canadian Conference on Homelessness held at York University in 2005. The event brought together over 800 people who conduct research, provide services, develop programs and formulate policy regarding homelessness in Canada. In addition, Dr. Gaetz has also been guest editor of a special issue of the Canadian Review of Social Policy focusing on homelessness.
Dr. Gaetz’ research interests include homelessness, youth culture, criminal victimization and community development His research on street youth has focused on their economic strategies, health issues and legal and justice issues, and has resulted in numerous publications in scholarly journals. His research on street youth and oral health was used to advocate for better dental services for marginalized populations. This research played an important role in establishing Canada's first free dental service for street youth. Prior to York University, Dr. Gaetz worked in the community health sector, including the Shout Clinic (a health clinic for street youth in Toronto), as well as Queen West Community Health Centre in Toronto.
Dr. Gaetz has currently received multi-year funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) to establish the Canadian Homelessness Research Network. The goal of this network is to work with researchers, service providers, government representatives, and the general public across Canada, in order to mobilize homelessness research for greater impact on homelessness policy and planning.
Finally, he is the Principal Investigator and Director of the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness/Homeless Hub, from the 2008 SSHRC Cluster Grant proposal which garnered him a 7-year grant. The Homeless Hub is an online research library and information center containing more than 25,000 homelessness related items.
He is the secretary of the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness with Alex Himelfarb as Chair and Tim Richter as Vice-Chair. The York-University based Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness based on the highly successful American model originated in 2000, also focusses on 10-year Plans to End Homelessness and Housing First approaches.
He was appointed into the Order of Canada with the grade of member, one of Canada's highest civilian honours.


Staten Island Transfer Station


Hussein Fahmy

Hussein Fahmy (; born 22 March 1940) is an Egyptian actor. He worked in the film and television industry for more than 50 years, specializing in film directing and appearing in over 100 film, television, and theatre productions. He graduated from UCLA with a Master of Fine Arts (MFA) degree. Academically he continued to teach at the Academy of Arts (film institute) for twelve years. A leading movie star and the first UNDP Regional Goodwill Ambassador for the Arab States in 1998, Hussein Fahmy is noted for his humanitarian effort. He has worked hard to convey to his audience in the Middle East important human development issues. His contract ended before the Lebanese situation in 2006.
Early life and career.
In March 2007, Fahmy was named the first Special Olympics Ambassador for the Middle East North Africa Region. In this role, he will work to create awareness and encourage all members of the community to be involved in the movement. He was also appointed the President of the Cairo International Film Festival (1998–2001). In 2006, he hosted a television show, for the first time in his show business career, "Elnas wa Ana" aired on the Egyptian television and el-Hayah channel.
Personal life.
Hussein Fahmy has been married five times. His first wife was Nadia Moharram, an Egyptian ambassador's daughter, whom he married after his college graduation. The couple had two children. His second wife was the Egyptian actress Mervat Amin (1974–1986), from whom he had their daughter, Menatallah. He later married a computer specialist, Hala Fathy (2001–2007). In 2008, he married the actress Leeka Sewidan whom he divorced in August 2012. Afterwards, he married a Bahraini business woman named Rana Algosaibi (2013–2016).
Filmography.
Hussein Fahmy has starred in 112 films throughout his career, from his debut in 1963 to the present.


Helen Durham

Helen Anne Durham (born 1968), an international humanitarian lawyer, is the Director of International Law and Policy at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Durham served as director of international law, strategy, planning and research at the Australian Red Cross, and has worked as ICRC head of office in Sydney.
She has a PhD in international humanitarian law and international criminal law, and is a senior fellow at Melbourne Law School.
In 2014, Durham was inducted into the Victorian Honour Roll of Women.
Durham was one of the participants at TEDxSydney in May 2015, where she explained that, even in the worst conflicts, basic human values can prevail.
In 2017 Durham was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to international relations in the area of humanitarian and criminal law, to the protection of women during times of armed conflict, and to legal education.
Durham is married to singer/songwriter Greg Arnold. The couple have two children. She was the inspiration for the song "Happy Birthday Helen" by Arnold's band Things of Stone and Wood.


Malta Channel

Malta Channel separates the European island of Malta from the southern tip of Sicily. The channel serves as a sea route link to Europe for the Maltese. Virtu Ferries take people from Malta to Italy and vice versa.
In World War II, this sea saw naval battles and was also heavily mined when the Crown Colony of Malta tried to supply the island. Also there were other naval battles fought between the Knights of Malta and the Ottoman Navy, and also during the Punic Wars.


Wards Island Water Pollution Control Plant


Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co.

Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co., was a New York court case in which New York's highest court considered whether permanent damages were an appropriate remedy in lieu of a permanent injunction. The case was one of the first and most influential instances of a court applying permanent damages. It is widely referenced in law and economics research and case law.
Background.
Oscar H. Boomer and other Land owners with property adjacent to a cement plant had sued, alleging that dirt, smoke and vibration issuing from it constituted nuisance. The trial court agreed and awarded damages, but rejected the request for an injunction to cut off the problem.
On appeal, the court observed that ordinarily, "where a nuisance has been found and where there has been any substantial damage shown by the party complaining, an injunction will be granted." Following that path would result in closing the plant, however, and the court sought to avoid that "drastic remedy." Instead, it engaged in a cost-balancing analysis, contrasting the trial court's finding that the total permanent damages done to all plaintiffs was $185,000 with Atlantic Cement's investment in the plant (upwards of $45,000,000) and more than 350 jobs at stake. "The parties could settle this private litigation at any time if defendant paid enough money and the imminent threat of closing the plant would build up the pressure on defendant," the court observed:
[G]rant[ing] the injunction unless defendant pays plaintiffs such permanent damages as may be fixed by the court seems to do justice between the contending parties. All of the attributions of economic loss to the properties on which plaintiffs' complaints are based will have been redressed ... [and it] seems reasonable to think that the risk of being required to pay permanent damages to injured property owners by cement plant owners would itself be a reasonably effective spur to research for improved techniques to minimize nuisance.
The judges also discussed the concept of “servitude on land.” Servitude, in property law, ties rights and obligations to ownership of land so that they run with the land to successive owners. The majority described the damage imposed by the cement plant as a servitude on the land. They claimed that payment of permanent damages would constitute full compensation for the servitude placed on the land. The dissenting opinion posited that imposing a servitude on land where the impairment continues for a private use is unconstitutional. The author cited the state constitution—“private property shall not be taken for public use”—remarking that it does not mention private use and concluding that “the permanent impairment of private property for private purposes is not authorized in the absence of clearly demonstrated public benefit.” However, the majority's interpretation of the damage placed on the land by the nuisance held.
The trial court was ordered "to grant an injunction which shall be vacated upon payment by defendant of ... permanent damage[s] to the respective plaintiffs."
Significance.
The case is often cited as an illustration of the law and economics approach in nuisance law and property law. The court granted an injunction against the cement plant for nuisance, but permitted the plant to pay permanent damages after which the court would vacate the injunction. In essence, the court permitted the plant to pay the net present value of its effects and to continue polluting.


Cortinarius orellanus

Cortinarius orellanus, commonly known as the fool's webcap or fools webcap, is a species of deadly fungus in the family Cortinariaceae native to Europe. Within the genus it belongs to a group known as the Orellani, all of which are highly toxic—eating them results in kidney failure, which is often irreversible. The mushroom is generally tan to brown all over.
Taxonomy.
"Cortinarius orellanus" was first described by Swedish mycologist Elias Magnus Fries in his 1838 book "Epicrisis Systematis Mycologici seu Synopsis Hymenomycetum". It is one of seven highly toxic species that make up the orellani, a subgenus within genus "Cortinarius".
Description.
"Cortinarius orellanus" has a concave cap of diameter, though rare specimens reach across. The cap flattens with age. In colour, it is an orange-brown, and is covered in fine, fibrous scales but become smooth with age. The cap surface turns black with potassium hydroxide. The thick gills are light ochre-coloured, changing to a rust-brown with age as the spores mature. They have an adnate or sinuate connection to the stipe. The stipe is tall, and thick with a tapering base. It is the same colour or slightly paler than the cap, and is yellowish at the top. There are occasionally fragments of the pale yellow veil (cortina) attached to its lower half. The firm flesh is pale ochre. It smells slightly of radishes when cut and has no strong taste.
Distribution and habitat.
"Cortinarius orellanus" occurs in central and eastern Europe (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia), though is rare in Germany. It is occasionally found in southern Britain. It grows in deciduous forests under beech, hornbeam and oak, often near pine trees.
Toxicity.
The danger of "C. orellanus" was uncovered in 1957, after (in 1952) 102 people fell ill after eating it in Bydgoszcz, Poland. Eleven of the victims died. Since then, cases of poisoning have been recorded in France, Switzerland, and Germany. In 1997, four people suffered renal toxicity after mistaking "C. orellanus" for the edible and prized chanterelle in Austria, where wild mushroom picking is popular.
The relevant toxin is orellanine.


Joseph Ray Hodgson

Joseph Ray Hodgson (3 October 1829—15 October 1908) was an Englishman hailed as a hero dozens of times after risking his life to save people from drowning, often during a winter storm in the North Sea. He was nicknamed The Stormy Petrel, after the seabirds, because whenever a gale blew up, he could be seen on Sunderland pier searching the skyline for ships in distress in order that he might help. Hodgson was living and working in Sunderland at the same time as the diver, Harry Watts, who was equally famed for saving lives. Hodgson is commemorated in the album titled "Stormy Petrel" by Sunderland punk band Leatherface.
Early life.
The son of a joiner, he was born in 1829 in Dunning Street, Bishopwearmouth, and was educated at The Gray School, Sunderland. By the age of 10, he was working with a gang of riggers on the ships but spent his spare time painting and carving wood; perhaps the former was less successful as he was proved to be colour blind. Hodgson made his first recorded rescue in 1844, at the age of 14, jumping into the River Wear to save three-year-old John Snowdon, who later became a renowned ship's captain. Hodgson was rewarded by the Royal Humane Society. He then saved John Nicholson, also in 1844, and pulled carver John Marshall from the Wear in 1847. Marshall repaid Hodgson by training him as a carver and gilder, which became his profession.
Career.
Hodgson carved a couple of figureheads for James Laing ship builder, for the "Ayres Quay" for £2.0.0 and the "Jane" for £4.10.0 in 1853. Four other orders which followed in 1854 were recorded as "steering wheel" at prices which ranged from £2.10.0 to £4.10.0. The records of the Doxford yard show that he carved figureheads for them in 1855 and 1856 for two ships. It was reported in the Newcastle Journal of 15 August 1861 that he joined the Royal Navy Reserve at Sunderland.
With the dominance of iron ships, Hodgson’s search for work took him to London at the age of 40, to Wapping, where he worked for the West African Shipping Company and as a model maker for a firm of boat builders in Limehouse between 1867–1888. However, he continued to save lives, including that of an interpreter during a voyage to Africa and as a volunteer fireman stationed at Walworth. He travelled the world, working on harbour related projects, and claimed to have saved lives wherever he was, from Australia to Mogador, but also to have escaped death after being shot and stabbed by a Moor in Africa.
Life Saving.
As well as rescuing individuals from drowning, Hodgson was instrumental in rescuing the crews of 15 ships in six years, as part of a team of volunteers using life boats or a Breeches buoy, usually carrying the rocket lines or hawser.
His recorded rescues include: Joseph Alexander, who was knocked overboard by a keel's tiller in 1847; William Cornage (or Carnegie), a seaman who fell into the river in 1847; John McTeen (or McTun/ McLean), washed from a lifeboat following a shipwreck in 1849; the crew of the ship "Thomas Clarkson" in 1852; the crews of the "Medina" and the "Harmony" in January 1854; the captain's wife and her baby from the sinking "Samuel and Sarah" in 1854; a cabin boy from the wrecked "Niagara", as well as the crews of the "Victoria", "Coldstream", "Calypso" and "Margaret" – all in 1854; the master of the brig "Brenda" in 1855; the crew of the "Maddalena" in September 1856; the crews of the "Rienzi", the schooner "Isabella" and the "Six Sisters" in 1857; the crews of the "Blucher" and the "Poulton" in 1858; Mr. Jacob Cresswell, of Wreckenton, saved from drowning in the sea at Short Sands, Tynemouth, 1857 (26 July); the crews of the "James Bales" and of the French schooner "Les Trois Soeurs" in 1857; a man pulled from the river at Cox Green, Sunderland 1869; John Dean, son of a pilot, from the Regent's Canal Docks in 1872.
A description of his daring rescue of the crew of "Les Trois Soeurs" appeared in the "Penny Illustrated Paper" (1864). It was remarkable because Hodgson, realising the French crew didn't understand the meaning of the flares and rocket lines, tied a rope around his waist and swam out through the squall to the ship, managing to clamber aboard and assist all the crew to shore. His deeds were also recorded in "The Illustrated London News" (1858) and he was included in a book called "Everyday Heroes" published by SPCK in 1889 which aimed to inspire its readers and promote good deeds or, at least, proper behaviour.
He wrote a pamphlet describing life-saving methods, which was widely published, including in the Newcastle Journal (1859) and the Lifeboat Journal (1858) and he also gave demonstrations of his skills.
Life Raft Patent.
In 1869 he applied for a patent for a design for a life raft but the Stamp Duty fee of £50 was never paid so that the patent became void in 1872. However, in conjunction with Illius Timmis, he brought out a reversible lifeboat, the Timmis-Hodgson, for which silver medals were granted at the North East Coast Exhibition at Tynemouth in 1882, and at the International Fisheries Exhibition in 1883. These boats met with the approval of the Admiralty, Trinity House, and the Board of Trade officials, before whom experiments were carried out, including a competition off the coast of Brighton with the RNLI boat ‘The Rescue’, as illustrated by W Overton for the Illustrated London News, Dec 1886.
Medals.
The Sunderland yearbook of 1910 reports that Hodgson had garnered 2 gold medals and 5 silver medals during his lifetime. The local records of events (pub July 1866) report that on 16 January 1856 "Joseph Hodgson, carver, Sunderland, received the silver medal of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution in testimony of his extraordinary exertions at saving life, extending over a period of twelve years. He had personally rescued 10 persons from drowning and assisted, in life and other boats, in saving 17 others. He had always declined any pecuniary considerations for his service but was very solicitous to possess the medal of the old and valuable institution…" In London his rescue of a young man from the Regent's Canal Docks in 1872 resulted in a bronze Royal Humane Society medal. In 1883, he accepted an invitation to return to Sunderland to be presented with a gold medal from the mayor on 11 September in the Mayor’s Chamber. He turned down an offer of £5 but was proudly photographed wearing his medals. Hodgson was rewarded handsomely for his most notable rescue, that of "Les Trois Soeurs": as well as a gift of a gold watch from the ship's captain, he received a silver medal from the Board of Trade and a gold one from Emperor Napoleon III of France. Hodgson’s silver Board of Trade medal was auctioned in September 2008.
Later life.
In 1850 Hodgson married Esther Copeland Sloan, also of Bishopswearmouth, in Durham. They had 11 children together. They moved to London's East End in 1860 and lived in various addresses around Poplar and Limehouse. He is listed in the 1901 census as being a carpenter, carver and employer. He and his wife left London for Australia during the docks disputes of the 1880s, where Esther died in 1895. He returned to Limehouse and remarried – at the age of 70 – to Elizabeth Nimmo, a woman 14 years his junior. But, despite his fame due to his many rescues, he died a poor man – forced to pawn his 8 bravery medals to survive. He spent his last few years in lodgings in Suffolk Street, Poplar – the same street that Will Crooks, Labour MP and former mayor of Poplar, was born. Crooks visited the old man in 1908, and wrote to the Carnegie Hero Fund on his behalf; but in vain, as ‘The Stormy Petrel’ died of pneumonia later that same year. He was buried in East London Cemetery and Crematorium, Plaistow, London, in a public (or 'paupers') grave. A new headstone was installed by a relative in 2006 with the following inscription:
The Everyday Hero - JOSEPH RAY HODGSON (STORMY PETREL)- Born 3.10 1829 Sunderland. Died: 15.10. 1908 Poplar.
A Brave and Unselfish Man Risking His Own Life to Save Others From Shipwrecks.
Commemorated Here By His Proud Descendants- C.S. 2006


Clara Hale

Clara McBride Hale (April 1, 1905 – December 18, 1992), also known as Mother Hale, was an American humanitarian who founded the Hale House Center, a home for unwanted children and children who were born addicted to drugs.
Early life.
Clara McBride was born April 1, 1905 in Elizabeth City, North Carolina and raised in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Clara married shortly after high school and moved to New York City where she studied business administration, cleaned, and worked as a domestic. She was 27 when her husband died. She had three children, Nathan, Lorraine and adopted son Kenneth. In 1938, her husband died from cancer, and Hale struggled to support her children through the Great Depression. Her rough life made it hard to financially support and care for her three children, consequently she had to find a job. Hale cleaned houses and continued her job as a janitor, laboring day and night to make ends meet.
Eventually she retired from these jobs to spend more time with her children. She stayed home with her children and in order to be as big a part of their lives as possible, Hale opened her own home daycare, initially keeping the children while their parents worked during the day. The children that she cared for found her home to be such a caring and loving environment they did not want to go home at the end of the day, most began to stay full-time only seeing their mothers on the weekends. She used her home as a day care for other struggling parents which later led her to become a foster parent. In the 1940s, she provided short-term and long-term care for community children in her home. She also found permanent homes for homeless children and taught parents essential parenting skills. Hale became a foster mother and got a license and took in 7-8 children at a time. By 1947-1968, she had taken care of 40 foster children.
Jobs.
Hale was living in Harlem, New York, where she retired from working as a domestic and started her work by beginning to help addicted children in 1969. Although Hale had originally opened her house as a way of making a living, it eventually led her to find her life calling. She took babies addicted to Heroin into her home, and within months, she was caring for 22 infants. Mother Hale became known for the work she did and became known as a mother to those who did not have one. At the age of 65 is when Hale began to take children in who were born addicted to their mother's drug habits during pregnancy.
This started in 1969 when Clara Hale's biological daughter, Lorraine, brought a mother and child who were addicted to drugs to Hale's home. She later got a home license as a "child care facility" in 1970, called the Hale House. A few years later Hale purchased a larger building, a 5 story home so there could be more space and more room to fit more, and in 1975 she was able to attain a license in child-care. It was officially known as Hale House. After that time, Hale devoted her life to caring for needy children. She took in children, free of charge, who were addicted to drugs and helped them through their addictive periods. She would raise the children as if they were her own and once they were healthy she would help to find families interested in adoption. She took it upon herself to make sure the families were a correct fit and even in some cases turned families down if she thought they could not provide a good enough home for the child. She eventually helped over 1,000 drug addicted babies and young children who were born addicted to drugs, children born with HIV, and children whose parents had died of AIDS. It was simple, she said; "hold them, rock them, love them and tell them how great they are."
Programs.
Later her work with kids extended beyond just the care. Many programs were created for children and families to help them more. Some examples are Community-Based Family; which is a program for troubled youngsters; Time-Out-Moms, a program that helps the parents out by having a place for their kids when their parents needed to relax or breathe. They also had Children Help Children, which was a program for juveniles. In addition, the Hale House launched research programs about problems of drug- or alcohol-addicted mothers and their infants to help educate the problems they can face. Families also went to this home that were infected with HIV or AIDS, and also the Hale house established programs for housing, educating, and supporting mothers after detoxification.
Death.
Shortly before her death in New York City, she kept at least one infant in her own room. She died of complications of a stroke on December 18, 1992 at the age of 87. According to Rev. Dr. James A. Forbes, Jr., Senior Minister at Riverside Church where she and her family were members, "She left instructions that there be no sad funerals." Her funeral took place on December 23 with over 2,000 people in attendance, including Mayor David Dinkins, US Senator Alfonse D'Amato, former Manhattan Borough President Percy Sutton, US Representative Charles Rangel, Adam Clayton Powell IV, Manhattan Borough President Ruth Messinger, the Reverend Al Sharpton, Dr. Calvin O. Butts, Yoko Ono and her son, Sean Lennon. *This roster shows the scope of respect this extraordinary woman had gained in the world for her work to positively influence so many children, their families and the entire Harlem community.
After her death in 1992, Hale's work was continued by her daughter, Dr. Lorraine Hale. Unfortunately, the climate at Hale House clearly changed with Mother Hale's death, specifically because it was under the control of her daughter. In 2001, the Hale House was under investigation for skirting the law and misuse of money solicited from the public. An interim board found what it called "credible evidence that Hale House engaged in transactions involving self-dealing and other conflicts of interest, resulting in the waste of corporate assets and the violation of its legal and contractual obligations." Dr. Hale was subsequently forced out amid reports of financial mismanagement. She and her husband were arrested, charged with using more than $1 million in donations to make home improvements, lend money to relatives and prop up an off-Broadway flop. Although the younger Dr. Hale was removed by Hale House, the house continues to operate.
The Mother Clara Hale Depot was named in her honor by the MTA in 1993.
Hale's motivation.
Hale's father died when she was a baby. This left her mother alone to raise Hale and her four siblings. Her mother placed a very high importance on parenting and being available to her children during their development. She supported her children through cooking for others and also allowing boarders to stay in their home. It seems that Hale gained this same love and appreciation for parenting. Hale claimed that everything she was able to accomplish was due to her mother and the parenting that she witnessed as a child.
Harlem was recognized for the amount of citizens living at poverty level, high unemployment rates, and unsanitary living conditions. It was stated in the New York Herald at the time, that it was "…the poorest, the unhealthiest, the unhappiest and the most crowded single large section of New York". Growing up in Harlem, the mid 1900s didn't allow for a promising future. During this time period it was exceptionally hard to receive a good education. In 1962, 96 percent of Harlem's students were African American. Due to the racial issues at the time there were very few teachers who were willing to teach and provide the students with sufficient enough education. According to test scores, by the end junior high level the majority of students were more than two and a half years behind the average New York City student. Hale recognized the importance that an education provided and also the need for an opportunity to receive one.
Hale also put a great deal of value into her religious upbringing. She was raised as a part of a Baptist church. It can also be suggested that her faith in God and strong moral upbringing had a lot to do with the behavior that she displayed throughout her life. It was stated by Hale herself that through her childhood she faced many hard times but it was due to her Christian upbringing that she was able to succeed. One major accomplishment in Hale's life was being the first in her family to graduate from high school. This was not seen to be a regular occurrence during her time period but due to the morals and ethics that Hale had learned throughout her time in the church this was something she expected of herself. This advanced education may have also had part to do with the lifestyle that she would come to choose. It gave her an appreciation for ethnic and social class differences.
Awards.
In 1985, then-President Ronald Reagan honored Clara Hale as an American hero in his State of the Union Address. In 1986, the Women's International Center gave Hale the Living Legacy Award which "honor(s) women for their great contributions to humanity."


Trespass to Property Act (Ontario)

The Trespass to Property Act is a statute enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Canada. It deals with illegal entry into private and public property. The current Act was amended most recently in 2016.
Under the Canadian constitution, criminal law is within the realm of federal authority and anyone violating this provincial statute is therefore subject to quasi-criminal (not full criminal) enforcement under the "Provincial Offences Act". The Act is an attempt to codify what was formerly a matter of common law. It is most often used by private-property owners to keep unwanted individuals off their property. There are many methods of notifying unwanted individuals that they have been banned (for future access), but the most common is a personal notice to the offender.
In general under the Act, owners must give notice either orally or in writing except where fencing is applied around gardens or areas under cultivation, or the keeping of animals. Access to the door of a building on premises for lawful purposes is protected except where specifically prohibited. A sign showing a graphic representation or wording of prohibited access is sufficient. Red markings indicate no trespassing, while yellow markings indicate limited access for certain activities. Trespassers can be fined not more than and may be levied costs or damages.
Similar laws exist in Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan.
The first Act was enacted in 1834, and was known as the "Act to provide for the Summary Punishment of Petty Trespasses and other offences".


Per Holknekt

Per Olof Holknekt, (born 27 April 1960) is a Swedish fashion designer and entrepreneur. He is also the founder of several magazines and companies, the most successful of which is the clothing company Odd Molly.
Life and career.
Holknekt grew up in Falun, Dalarna. His father was a police officer and his mother was a school principal. He moved to Hermosa Beach, California, in 1980, and for several years was a professional skateboarder, winning several international competitions. In 1984, while in California, he founded the skateboarding magazine "Transworld Skateboarding". He returned to Sweden in 1984 and studied economics at IHM Business School, after which he started the skateboard company Street Style with his brother Thomas. Later, he founded another skateboard company, Svea, which launched a skateboard brand and a clothing label.
Holknekt developed a drug addiction, and went through a life crisis in 2000, during which he lost everything, became homeless, and supported himself by selling the Stockholm street newspaper "Situation Sthlm". He sought treatment for his addiction and regained sobriety. After four months of being sober he successfully applied to become a housemate on the first season of the Swedish "Big Brother" series, in which he finished in second place after being voted off in the final on Day 74. The show was broadcast on Kanal 5.
In 2002, Holknekt started working with fashion designer Karin Jimfelt-Ghatan, and together they started the international clothing company Odd Molly. In 2010 the two were named "Founders of the Year" at Sweden's annual entrepreneurial gala Entreprenörsgalan. In 2013 Holknekt revealed that he would leave Odd Molly after twelve years to start working as a branding consultant for different brands.
On 19 June 2012, the first edition of Holknekt's magazine "Miss World" was published. He was the chief editor, but only two issues were published before it was discontinued.
Holknekt was one of the hosts of the Sveriges Radio show "Sommar" in 2010. In 2014 Holknekt published his autobiography, "Per Holknekt 1960–2014", co-written by Markus Lutteman.
Holknekt is also a successful pinball player, and has participated in national, European, and world championships hosted by the Professional Amateur Pinball Association.
In 2016, Holknekt was arrested and fined for drunk driving and speeding on his motorboat by the Coast Guard. He was fined 30,000 SEK
Personal life.
Holknekt was married to an American woman for three years during his time in California. After returning to Sweden he became involved with a woman with whom he had a daughter in the 1990s. In 2000, during his participation in "Big Brother", he met singer Viktoria Tolstoy, and the couple were married in 2001. They divorced in March 2008. He later married singer Lena Philipsson in 2010, but they were divorced in July 2013. In June 2015, Holknekt announced he had once again fallen in love, this time with 36-year-old fashion photographer Anna Lundell.


Department of the Environment Act (Canada)

The Department of the Environment Act establishes Environment Canada as the federal agency in Canada responsible for the preservation and enhancement of the quality of the natural environment. The Act specifies that the Department (Environment Canada) will be governed by the Minister of the Environment. Provincial and territorial governments in Canada also have jurisdiction for environmental quality (such as regional air quality management).
The Act describes the powers of the Minister as related to water, air and soil quality; renewable resources, including migratory birds and other non-domestic flora and fauna; meteorology; the enforcement of rules and regulations arising from the advice of the International Joint Commission relating to boundary waters and questions arising between the United States and Canada insofar as they relate to the preservation and enhancement of environmental quality.
The Act requires that the Minister must submit an annual report to Parliament by January 31 showing the operations of the Department for that fiscal year.


Competition law

Competition law is a law that promotes or seeks to maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. Competition law is implemented through public and private enforcement. It is also known as "anti-monopoly law" in China and Russia. In previous years it has been known as "trade practices law" in the United Kingdom and Australia. In the European Union, it is referred to as both "antitrust" and "competition law".
The history of competition law reaches back to the Roman Empire. The business practices of market traders, guilds and governments have always been subject to scrutiny, and sometimes severe sanctions. Since the 20th century, competition law has become global. The two largest and most influential systems of competition regulation are United States antitrust law and European Union competition law. National and regional competition authorities across the world have formed international support and enforcement networks.
Modern competition law has historically evolved on a national level to promote and maintain fair competition in markets principally within the territorial boundaries of nation-states. National competition law usually does not cover activity beyond territorial borders unless it has significant effects at nation-state level. Countries may allow for extraterritorial jurisdiction in competition cases based on so-called "effects doctrine". The protection of international competition is governed by international competition agreements. In 1945, during the negotiations preceding the adoption of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947, limited international competition obligations were proposed within the "Charter for an International Trade Organisation". These obligations were not included in GATT, but in 1994, with the conclusion of the Uruguay Round of GATT multilateral negotiations, the World Trade Organization (WTO) was created. The "Agreement Establishing the WTO" included a range of limited provisions on various cross-border competition issues on a sector specific basis.
Principle.
Competition law, or antitrust law, has three main elements:
Substance and practice of competition law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Protecting the interests of consumers (consumer welfare) and ensuring that entrepreneurs have an opportunity to compete in the market economy are often treated as important objectives. Competition law is closely connected with law on deregulation of access to markets, state aids and subsidies, the privatization of state owned assets and the establishment of independent sector regulators, among other market-oriented supply-side policies. In recent decades, competition law has been viewed as a way to provide better public services. Robert Bork argued that competition laws can produce adverse effects when they reduce competition by protecting inefficient competitors and when costs of legal intervention are greater than benefits for the consumers.
History.
Roman legislation.
An early example was enacted during the Roman Republic around 50 BC. To protect the grain trade, heavy fines were imposed on anyone directly, deliberately, and insidiously stopping supply ships. Under Diocletian in 301 A.D., an edict imposed the death penalty for anyone violating a tariff system, for example by buying up, concealing, or contriving the scarcity of everyday goods. More legislation came under the constitution of Zeno of 483 A.D., which can be traced into Florentine municipal laws of 1322 and 1325. This provided for confiscation of property and banishment for any trade combination or joint action of monopolies private "or" granted by the Emperor. Zeno rescinded all previously granted exclusive rights. Justinian I subsequently introduced legislation to pay officials to manage state monopolies.
Middle Ages.
Legislation in England to control monopolies and restrictive practices was in force well before the Norman Conquest. The Domesday Book recorded that "foresteel" (i.e. forestalling, the practice of buying up goods before they reach market and then inflating the prices) was one of three forfeitures that King Edward the Confessor could carry out through England. But concern for fair prices also led to attempts to directly regulate the market. Under Henry III an act was passed in 1266 to fix bread and ale prices in correspondence with grain prices laid down by the assizes. Penalties for breach included amercements, pillory and tumbrel. A 14th-century statute labelled forestallers as "oppressors of the poor and the community at large and enemies of the whole country". Under King Edward III the Statute of Labourers of 1349 fixed wages of artificers and workmen and decreed that foodstuffs should be sold at reasonable prices. On top of existing penalties, the statute stated that overcharging merchants must pay the injured party double the sum he received, an idea that has been replicated in punitive treble damages under US antitrust law. Also under Edward III, the following statutory provision outlawed trade combination.
... we have ordained and established, that no merchant or other shall make Confederacy, Conspiracy, Coin, Imagination, or Murmur, or Evil Device in any point that may turn to the Impeachment, Disturbance, Defeating or Decay of the said Staples, or of anything that to them pertaineth, or may pertain.
In continental Europe, competition principles developed in "lex mercatoria". Examples of legislation enshrining competition principles include the "constitutiones juris metallici" by Wenceslaus II of Bohemia between 1283 and 1305, condemning combination of ore traders increasing prices; the Municipal Statutes of Florence in 1322 and 1325 followed Zeno's legislation against state monopolies; and under Emperor Charles V in the Holy Roman Empire a law was passed "to prevent losses resulting from monopolies and improper contracts which many merchants and artisans made in the Netherlands". In 1553, Henry VIII of England reintroduced tariffs for foodstuffs, designed to stabilize prices, in the face of fluctuations in supply from overseas. So the legislation read here that whereas,
it is very hard and difficult to put certain prices to any such things ... [it is necessary because] prices of such victuals be many times enhanced and raised by the Greedy Covetousness and Appetites of the Owners of such Victuals, by occasion of ingrossing and regrating the same, more than upon any reasonable or just ground or cause, to the great damage and impoverishing of the King's subjects.
Around this time organizations representing various tradesmen and handicrafts people, known as guilds had been developing, and enjoyed many concessions and exemptions from the laws against monopolies. The privileges conferred were not abolished until the Municipal Corporations Act 1835.
Early competition law in Europe.
The English common law of restraint of trade is the direct predecessor to modern competition law later developed in the US. It is based on the prohibition of agreements that ran counter to public policy, unless the reasonableness of an agreement could be shown. It effectively prohibited agreements designed to restrain another's trade. The 1414 "Dyer's" is the first known restrictive trade agreement to be examined under English common law. A dyer had given a bond not to exercise his trade in the same town as the plaintiff for six months but the plaintiff had promised nothing in return. On hearing the plaintiff's attempt to enforce this restraint, Hull J exclaimed, "per Dieu, if the plaintiff were here, he should go to prison until he had paid a fine to the King". The court denied the collection of a bond for the dyer's breach of agreement because the agreement was held to be a restriction on trade. English courts subsequently decided a range of cases which gradually developed competition related case law, which eventually were transformed into statute law.
Europe around the 16th century was changing quickly. The new world had just been opened up, overseas trade and plunder was pouring wealth through the international economy and attitudes among businessmen were shifting. In 1561 a system of Industrial Monopoly Licenses, similar to modern patents had been introduced into England. But by the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, the system was reputedly much abused and used merely to preserve privileges, encouraging nothing new in the way of innovation or manufacture. In response English courts developed case law on restrictive business practices. The statute followed the unanimous decision in "Darcy v. Allein" 1602, also known as the Case of Monopolies, of the King's bench to declare void the sole right that Queen Elizabeth I had granted to Darcy to import playing cards into England. Darcy, an officer of the Queen's household, claimed damages for the defendant's infringement of this right. The court found the grant void and that three characteristics of monopoly were (1) price increases, (2) quality decrease, (3) the tendency to reduce artificers to idleness and beggary. This put an end to granted monopolies until King James I began to grant them again. In 1623 Parliament passed the Statute of Monopolies, which for the most part excluded patent rights from its prohibitions, as well as guilds. From King Charles I, through the civil war and to King Charles II, monopolies continued, especially useful for raising revenue. Then in 1684, in "East India Company v. Sandys" it was decided that exclusive rights to trade only outside the realm were legitimate, on the grounds that only large and powerful concerns could trade in the conditions prevailing overseas.
The development of early competition law in England and Europe progressed with the diffusion of writings such as "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith, who first established the concept of the "market economy". At the same time industrialisation replaced the individual artisan, or group of artisans, with paid labourers and machine-based production. Commercial success increasingly dependent on maximizing production while minimizing cost. Therefore, the size of a company became increasingly important, and a number of European countries responded by enacting laws to regulate large companies that restricted trade. Following the French Revolution in 1789 the law of 14–17 June 1791 declared agreements by members of the same trade that fixed the price of an industry or labour as void, unconstitutional, and hostile to liberty. Similarly, the Austrian Penal Code of 1852 established that "agreements ... to raise the price of a commodity ... to the disadvantage of the public should be punished as misdemeanours". Austria passed a law in 1870 abolishing the penalties, though such agreements remained void. However, in Germany laws clearly validated agreements between firms to raise prices. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, ideas that dominant private companies or legal monopolies could excessively restrict trade were further developed in Europe. However, as in the late 19th century, a depression spread through Europe, known as the Panic of 1873, ideas of competition lost favour, and it was felt that companies had to co-operate by forming cartels to withstand huge pressures on prices and profits.
Modern competition law.
While the development of competition law stalled in Europe during the late 19th century, in 1889 Canada enacted what is considered the first competition statute of modern times. The "Act for the Prevention and Suppression of Combinations formed in restraint of Trade" was passed one year before the United States enacted the most famous legal statute on competition law, the Sherman Act of 1890. It was named after Senator John Sherman who argued that the Act "does not announce a new principle of law, but applies old and well recognised principles of common law".
United States antitrust.
The Sherman Act of 1890 attempted to outlaw the restriction of competition by large companies, who co-operated with rivals to fix outputs, prices and market shares, initially through "pools" and later through "trusts". Trusts first appeared in the US railroads, where the capital requirement of railroad construction precluded competitive services in then scarcely settled territories. This trust allowed railroads to discriminate on rates imposed and services provided to consumers and businesses and to destroy potential competitors. Different trusts could be dominant in different industries. The Standard Oil Company trust in the 1880s controlled several markets, including the market in fuel oil, lead and whiskey. Vast numbers of citizens became sufficiently aware and publicly concerned about how the trusts negatively impacted them that the Act became a priority for both major parties. A primary concern of this act is that competitive markets themselves should provide the primary regulation of prices, outputs, interests and profits. Instead, the Act outlawed anticompetitive practices, codifying the common law restraint of trade doctrine. Prof Rudolph Peritz has argued that competition law in the United States has evolved around two sometimes conflicting concepts of competition: first that of individual liberty, free of government intervention, and second a fair competitive environment free of excessive economic power. Since the enactment of the Sherman Act enforcement of competition law has been based on various economic theories adopted by Government.
Section 1 of the Sherman Act declared illegal "every contract, in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations." Section 2 prohibits monopolies, or attempts and conspiracies to monopolize. Following the enactment in 1890 US court applies these principles to business and markets. Courts applied the Act without consistent economic analysis until 1914, when it was complemented by the Clayton Act which specifically prohibited exclusive dealing agreements, particularly tying agreements and interlocking directorates, and mergers achieved by purchasing stock. From 1915 onwards the "rule of reason" analysis was frequently applied by courts to competition cases. However, the period was characterized by the lack of competition law enforcement. From 1936 to 1972 courts' application of antitrust law was dominated by the "structure-conduct-performance" paradigm of the Harvard School. From 1973 to 1991, the enforcement of antitrust law was based on efficiency explanations as the Chicago School became dominant, and through legal writings such as Judge Robert Bork's book "The Antitrust Paradox". Since 1992 game theory has frequently been used in antitrust cases.
With the Hart–Scott–Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, mergers and acquisitions came into additional scrutiny from U.S. regulators. Under the act, parties must make a per-merger notification to the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission prior to the completion of a transaction. As of February 2nd, 2021, the FTC reduced the Hart-Scott-Rodino reporting threshold to $92 million in combined assets for the transaction.
European Union law.
Competition law gained new recognition in Europe in the inter-war years, with Germany enacting its first anti-cartel law in 1923 and Sweden and Norway adopting similar laws in 1925 and 1926 respectively. However, with the Great Depression of 1929 competition law disappeared from Europe and was revived following the Second World War when the United Kingdom and Germany, following pressure from the United States, became the first European countries to adopt fully fledged competition laws. At a regional level EU competition law has its origins in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) agreement between France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Germany in 1951 following the Second World War. The agreement aimed to prevent Germany from re-establishing dominance in the production of coal and steel as it was felt that this dominance had contributed to the outbreak of the war. Article 65 of the agreement banned cartels and article 66 made provisions for concentrations, or mergers, and the abuse of a dominant position by companies. This was the first time that competition law principles were included in a plurilateral regional agreement and established the trans-European model of competition law. In 1957 competition rules were included in the Treaty of Rome, also known as the EC Treaty, which established the European Economic Community (EEC). The Treaty of Rome established the enactment of competition law as one of the main aims of the EEC through the "institution of a system ensuring that competition in the common market is not distorted". The two central provisions on EU competition law on companies were established in article 85, which prohibited anti-competitive agreements, subject to some exemptions, and article 86 prohibiting the abuse of dominant position. The treaty also established principles on competition law for member states, with article 90 covering public undertakings, and article 92 making provisions on state aid. Regulations on mergers were not included as member states could not establish consensus on the issue at the time.
Today, the Treaty of Lisbon prohibits anti-competitive agreements in Article 101(1), including price fixing. According to Article 101(2) any such agreements are automatically void. Article 101(3) establishes exemptions, if the collusion is for distributional or technological innovation, gives consumers a "fair share" of the benefit and does not include unreasonable restraints that risk eliminating competition anywhere (or compliant with the general principle of European Union law of proportionality). Article 102 prohibits the abuse of dominant position, such as price discrimination and exclusive dealing. Article 102 allows the European Council regulations to govern mergers between firms (the current regulation is the Regulation 139/2004/EC). The general test is whether a concentration (i.e. merger or acquisition) with a community dimension (i.e. affects a number of EU member states) might significantly impede effective competition. Articles 106 and 107 provide that member state's right to deliver public services may not be obstructed, but that otherwise public enterprises must adhere to the same competition principles as companies. Article 107 lays down a general rule that the state may not aid or subsidize private parties in distortion of free competition and provides exemptions for charities, regional development objectives and in the event of a natural disaster.
Leading ECJ cases on competition law include "Consten & Grundig v Commission" and "United Brands v Commission".
India.
India responded positively by opening up its economy by removing controls during the Economic liberalisation. In quest of increasing the efficiency of the nation's economy, the Government of India acknowledged the Liberalization Privatization Globalization era. As a result, Indian market faces competition from within and outside the country. This led to the need of a strong legislation to dispense justice in commercial matters and the Competition Act, 2002 was passed. The history of competition law in India dates back to the 1960s when the first competition law, namely the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (MRTP) was enacted in 1969. But after the economic reforms in 1991, this legislation was found to be obsolete in many aspects and as a result, a new competition law in the form of the Competition Act, 2002 was enacted in 2003. The Competition Commission of India, is the quasi judicial body established for enforcing provisions of the Competition Act.
International expansion.
By 2008 111 countries had enacted competition laws, which is more than 50 percent of countries with a population exceeding 80,000 people. 81 of the 111 countries had adopted their competition laws in the past 20 years, signaling the spread of competition law following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the expansion of the European Union. Currently competition authorities of many states closely co-operate, on everyday basis, with foreign counterparts in their enforcement efforts, also in such key area as information / evidence sharing.
In many of Asia's developing countries, including India, Competition law is considered a tool to stimulate economic growth. In Korea and Japan, the competition law prevents certain forms of conglomerates. In addition, competition law has promoted fairness in China and Indonesia as well as international integration in Vietnam. Hong Kong's Competition Ordinance came into force in the year 2015.
ASEAN member states.
As part of the creation of the ASEAN Economic Community, the member states of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) pledged to enact competition laws and policies by the end of 2015. Today, all ten member states have general competition legislation in place. While there remains differences between regimes (for example, over merger control notification rules, or leniency policies for whistle-blowers), and it is unlikely that there will be a supranational competition authority for ASEAN (akin to the European Union), there is a clear trend towards increase in infringement investigations or decisions on cartel enforcement.
Enforcement.
At a national level competition law is enforced through competition authorities, as well as private enforcement. The United States Supreme Court explained:
Every violation of the antitrust laws is a blow to the free-enterprise system envisaged by Congress. This system depends on strong competition for its health and vigor, and strong competition depends, in turn, on compliance with antitrust legislation. In enacting these laws, Congress had many means at its disposal to penalize violators. It could have, for example, required violators to compensate federal, state, and local governments for the estimated damage to their respective economies caused by the violations. But, this remedy was not selected. Instead, Congress chose to permit all persons to sue to recover three times their actual damages every time they were injured in their business or property by an antitrust violation.
In the European Union, the Modernisation Regulation 1/2003 means that the European Commission is no longer the only body capable of public enforcement of European Union competition law. This was done to facilitate quicker resolution of competition-related inquiries. In 2005 the Commission issued a Green Paper on "Damages actions for the breach of the EC antitrust rules", which suggested ways of making private damages claims against cartels easier.
Some EU Member States enforce their competition laws with criminal sanctions. As analysed by Professor Whelan, these types of sanctions engender a number of significant theoretical, legal and practical challenges.
Antitrust administration and legislation can be seen as a balance between:
Chapter 5 of the post war Havana Charter contained an Antitrust code but this was never incorporated into the WTO's forerunner, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947. Office of Fair Trading Director and Professor Richard Whish wrote sceptically that it "seems unlikely at the current stage of its development that the WTO will metamorphose into a global competition authority". Despite that, at the ongoing Doha round of trade talks for the World Trade Organization, discussion includes the prospect of competition law enforcement moving up to a global level. While it is incapable of enforcement itself, the newly established International Competition Network (ICN) is a way for national authorities to coordinate their own enforcement activities.
Theory.
Classical perspective.
Under the doctrine of laissez-faire, antitrust is seen as unnecessary as competition is viewed as a long-term dynamic process where firms compete against each other for market dominance. In some markets, a firm may successfully dominate, but it is because of superior skill or innovativeness. However, according to laissez-faire theorists, when it tries to raise prices to take advantage of its monopoly position it creates profitable opportunities for others to compete. A process of creative destruction begins which erodes the monopoly. Therefore, government should not try to break up monopoly but should allow the market to work.
The classical perspective on competition was that certain agreements and business practice could be an unreasonable restraint on the individual liberty of tradespeople to carry on their livelihoods. Restraints were judged as permissible or not by courts as new cases appeared and in the light of changing business circumstances. Hence the courts found specific categories of agreement, specific clauses, to fall foul of their doctrine on economic fairness, and they did not contrive an overarching conception of market power. Earlier theorists like Adam Smith rejected any monopoly power on this basis.
A monopoly granted either to an individual or to a trading company has the same effect as a secret in trade or manufactures. The monopolists, by keeping the market constantly under-stocked, by never fully supplying the effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly above their natural rate.
In "The Wealth of Nations" (1776) Adam Smith also pointed out the cartel problem, but did not advocate specific legal measures to combat them.
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary.
By the latter half of the 19th century, it had become clear that large firms had become a fact of the market economy. John Stuart Mill's approach was laid down in his treatise "On Liberty" (1859).
Again, trade is a social act. Whoever undertakes to sell any description of goods to the public, does what affects the interest of other persons, and of society in general; and thus his conduct, in principle, comes within the jurisdiction of society... both the cheapness and the good quality of commodities are most effectually provided for by leaving the producers and sellers perfectly free, under the sole check of equal freedom to the buyers for supplying themselves elsewhere. This is the so-called doctrine of Free Trade, which rests on grounds different from, though equally solid with, the principle of individual liberty asserted in this Essay. Restrictions on trade, or on production for purposes of trade, are indeed restraints; and all restraint, qua restraint, is an evil...
Neo-classical synthesis.
After Mill, there was a shift in economic theory, which emphasized a more precise and theoretical model of competition. A simple neo-classical model of free markets holds that production and distribution of goods and services in competitive free markets maximizes social welfare. This model assumes that new firms can freely enter markets and compete with existing firms, or to use legal language, there are no barriers to entry. By this term economists mean something very specific, that competitive free markets deliver allocative, productive and dynamic efficiency. Allocative efficiency is also known as Pareto efficiency after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto and means that resources in an economy over the long run will go precisely to those who are willing and able to pay for them. Because rational producers will keep producing and selling, and buyers will keep buying up to the last marginal unit of possible output – or alternatively rational producers will be reduce their output to the margin at which buyers will buy the same amount as produced – there is no waste, the greatest number wants of the greatest number of people become satisfied and utility is perfected because resources can no longer be reallocated to make anyone better off without making someone else worse off; society has achieved allocative efficiency. Productive efficiency simply means that society is making as much as it can. Free markets are meant to reward those who work hard, and therefore those who will put society's resources towards the frontier of its possible production. Dynamic efficiency refers to the idea that business which constantly competes must research, create and innovate to keep its share of consumers. This traces to Austrian-American political scientist Joseph Schumpeter's notion that a "perennial gale of creative destruction" is ever sweeping through capitalist economies, driving enterprise at the market's mercy. This led Schumpeter to argue that monopolies did not need to be broken up (as with Standard Oil) because the next gale of economic innovation would do the same.
Contrasting with the allocatively, productively and dynamically efficient market model are monopolies, oligopolies, and cartels. When only one or a few firms exist in the market, and there is no credible threat of the entry of competing firms, prices rise above the competitive level, to either a monopolistic or oligopolistic equilibrium price. Production is also decreased, further decreasing social welfare by creating a deadweight loss. Sources of this market power are said to include the existence of externalities, barriers to entry of the market, and the free rider problem. Markets may fail to be efficient for a variety of reasons, so the exception of competition law's intervention to the rule of "laissez faire" is justified if government failure can be avoided. Orthodox economists fully acknowledge that perfect competition is seldom observed in the real world, and so aim for what is called "workable competition". This follows the theory that if one cannot achieve the ideal, then go for the second best option by using the law to tame market operation where it can.
Chicago school.
A group of economists and lawyers, who are largely associated with the University of Chicago, advocate an approach to competition law guided by the proposition that some actions that were originally considered to be anticompetitive could actually promote competition. The U.S. Supreme Court has used the Chicago school approach in several recent cases. One view of the Chicago school approach to antitrust is found in United States Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner's books "Antitrust Law" and "Economic Analysis of Law".
Robert Bork was highly critical of court decisions on United States antitrust law in a series of law review articles and his book "The Antitrust Paradox". Bork argued that both the original intention of antitrust laws and economic efficiency was the pursuit "only" of consumer welfare, the protection of competition rather than competitors. Furthermore, only a few acts should be prohibited, namely cartels that fix prices and divide markets, mergers that create monopolies, and dominant firms pricing predatorily, while allowing such practices as vertical agreements and price discrimination on the grounds that it did not harm consumers. Running through the different critiques of US antitrust policy is the common theme that government interference in the operation of free markets does more harm than good. "The only cure for bad theory," writes Bork, "is better theory." Harvard Law School professor Philip Areeda, who favours more aggressive antitrust policy, in at least one Supreme Court case challenged Robert Bork's preference for non-intervention.
Practice.
Dominance and monopoly.
When firms hold large market shares, consumers risk paying higher prices and getting lower quality products than compared to competitive markets. However, the existence of a very high market share does not always mean consumers are paying excessive prices since the threat of new entrants to the market can restrain a high-market-share firm's price increases. Competition law does not make merely having a monopoly illegal, but rather abusing the power that a monopoly may confer, for instance through exclusionary practices.
First, it is necessary to determine whether a firm is dominant, or whether it behaves "to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, customers and ultimately of its consumer". Under EU law, very large market shares raise a presumption that a firm is dominant, which may be rebuttable. If a firm has a dominant position, then there is "a special responsibility not to allow its conduct to impair competition on the common market". Similarly as with collusive conduct, market shares are determined with reference to the particular market in which the firm and product in question is sold. Then although the lists are seldom closed, certain categories of abusive conduct are usually prohibited under the country's legislation. For instance, limiting production at a shipping port by refusing to raise expenditure and update technology could be abusive. Tying one product into the sale of another can be considered abuse too, being restrictive of consumer choice and depriving competitors of outlets. This was the alleged case in "Microsoft v. Commission" leading to an eventual fine of million for including its Windows Media Player with the Microsoft Windows platform. A refusal to supply a facility which is essential for all businesses attempting to compete to use can constitute an abuse. One example was in a case involving a medical company named "Commercial Solvents". When it set up its own rival in the tuberculosis drugs market, Commercial Solvents were forced to continue supplying a company named Zoja with the raw materials for the drug. Zoja was the only market competitor, so without the court forcing supply, all competition would have been eliminated.
Forms of abuse relating directly to pricing include price exploitation. It is difficult to prove at what point a dominant firm's prices become "exploitative" and this category of abuse is rarely found. In one case however, a French funeral service was found to have demanded exploitative prices, and this was justified on the basis that prices of funeral services outside the region could be compared. A more tricky issue is predatory pricing. This is the practice of dropping prices of a product so much that one's smaller competitors cannot cover their costs and fall out of business. The Chicago school considers predatory pricing to be unlikely. However, in "France Telecom SA v. Commission" a broadband internet company was forced to pay $13.9 million for dropping its prices below its own production costs. It had "no interest in applying such prices except that of eliminating competitors" and was being cross-subsidized to capture the lion's share of a booming market. One last category of pricing abuse is price discrimination. An example of this could be a company offering rebates to industrial customers who export their sugar, but not to customers who are selling their goods in the same market.
Example.
According to The World Bank's "Republic of Armenia Accumulation, Competition, and Connectivity Global Competition" report which was published in 2013, the Global Competitiveness Index suggests that Armenia ranks lowest among ECA (Europe and Central Asia) countries in the effectiveness of anti-monopoly policy and the intensity of competition. This low ranking somehow explains the low employment and low incomes in Armenia.
Mergers and acquisitions.
A merger or acquisition involves, from a competition law perspective, the concentration of economic power in the hands of fewer than before. This usually means that one firm buys out the shares of another. The reasons for oversight of economic concentrations by the state are the same as the reasons to restrict firms who abuse a position of dominance, only that regulation of mergers and acquisitions attempts to deal with the problem before it arises, "ex ante" prevention of market dominance. In the United States merger regulation began under the Clayton Act, and in the European Union, under the Merger Regulation 139/2004 (known as the "ECMR"). Competition law requires that firms proposing to merge gain authorization from the relevant government authority. The theory behind mergers is that transaction costs can be reduced compared to operating on an open market through bilateral contracts. Concentrations can increase economies of scale and scope. However often firms take advantage of their increase in market power, their increased market share and decreased number of competitors, which can adversely affect the deal that consumers get. Merger control is about predicting what the market might be like, not knowing and making a judgment. Hence the central provision under EU law asks whether a concentration "would", if it went ahead, "significantly impede effective competition... in particular as a result of the creation or strengthening off a dominant position..." and the corresponding provision under US antitrust states similarly,
No person shall acquire, directly or indirectly, the whole or any part of the stock or other share capital... of the assets of one or more persons engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce, where... the effect of such acquisition, of such stocks or assets, or of the use of such stock by the voting or granting of proxies or otherwise, may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.
What amounts to a substantial lessening of, or significant impediment to competition is usually answered through empirical study. The market shares of the merging companies can be assessed and added, although this kind of analysis only gives rise to presumptions, not conclusions. The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index is used to calculate the "density" of the market, or what concentration exists. Aside from the maths, it is important to consider the product in question and the rate of technical innovation in the market. A further problem of collective dominance, or oligopoly through "economic links" can arise, whereby the new market becomes more conducive to collusion. It is relevant how transparent a market is, because a more concentrated structure could mean firms can coordinate their behavior more easily, whether firms can deploy deterrents and whether firms are safe from a reaction by their competitors and consumers. The entry of new firms to the market, and any barriers that they might encounter should be considered. If firms are shown to be creating an uncompetitive concentration, in the US they can still argue that they create efficiencies enough to outweigh any detriment, and similar reference to "technical and economic progress" is mentioned in Art. 2 of the ECMR. Another defense might be that a firm which is being taken over is about to fail or go insolvent, and taking it over leaves a no less competitive state than what would happen anyway. Mergers vertically in the market are rarely of concern, although in "AOL/Time Warner" the European Commission required that a joint venture with a competitor Bertelsmann be ceased beforehand. The EU authorities have also focused lately on the effect of conglomerate mergers, where companies acquire a large portfolio of related products, though without necessarily dominant shares in any individual market.
Intellectual property, innovation and competition.
Competition law has become increasingly intertwined with intellectual property, such as copyright, trademarks, patents, industrial design rights and in some jurisdictions trade secrets. It is believed that promotion of innovation through enforcement of intellectual property rights may promote as well as limit competitiveness. The question rests on whether it is legal to acquire monopoly through accumulation of intellectual property rights. In which case, the judgment needs to decide between giving preference to intellectual property rights or to competitiveness:
Concerns also arise over anti-competitive effects and consequences due to:
Some scholars suggest that a prize instead of patent would solve the problem of deadweight loss, when innovators got their reward from the prize, provided by the government or non-profit organization, rather than directly selling to the market, see Millennium Prize Problems. However, innovators may accept the prize only when it is at least as much as how much they earn from patent, which is a question difficult to determine.