French/English abstract: Les systèmes d’aide à la prise de décision jouent un rôle important dans la pratique juridique aux Pays-Bas. Divers organismes gouvernementaux utilisent de tels systèmes automatisés pour la prise de décisions juridiques (de masse). Les départements juridiques, les cabinets d’avocats, les éditeurs juridiques et d’autres organismes ont de plus en plus recours à ces outils pour appuyer et améliorer les services d’aide juridique aux particuliers et aux entreprises. Ces outils permettent d’améliorer l’efficacité des processus et des services juridiques, mais ils peuvent aussi avoir d’importants effets préjudiciables sur les droits des personnes ou sur la qualité juridique des services produits, en particulier lorsqu’il n’existe pas de processus de conception minutieux et transparent. Cet article donne un aperçu de l’utilisation de ces systèmes dans la pratique juridique néerlandaise, discute de leurs avantages, pièges et défis, puis il identifie certaines questions de recherche pour le futur.---Rule-based systems for decision support and decision-making play an important role in Dutch legal practice. Government agencies use rule-based systems for (mass) legal decision-making. Legal departments, law firms, legal publishers and various other organizations increasingly use rule-basedsystems to support and improve the provision of legal aid to private individuals and corporate clients. Rule-based systems can improve efficiency of legal processes and services, but can also have important detrimental effects on the rights of individuals or legal quality, especially when there is no careful and transparent design process. This article provides an overview of the use of these systems in Dutch legal practice, discusses benefits, pitfallsand challenges and identifies questions for future research.
The paper explores whether and under what conditions, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may become a mandatory requirement for employees. It includes a discussion on EU action on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and its relevance for national level policy with emphasis on the legal basis and instruments used by the Union to persuade national authorities into action to increase vaccination uptake. The analysis then moves to the national level by focusing on the case of Hungary. Following an overview of the legal and regulatory framework for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines deployment, the analysis zooms into the sphere of employment and explores whether and how the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination may be turned into a mandatory workplace safety requirement. The paper highlights the decision of the Hungarian government to introduce compulsory vaccination for employees in the healthcare sector, and concludes with a discussion of the relevant rules and their potential, broader implications.
MULTIFILE
In this paper we investigate the possible consequences of different institutional settings (in casu the legal system) on externalities and their effect on the efficient allocation of externalities. We investigate whether the restriction of marginally low transaction costs can be relaxed if the legal system is efficient. In this context we define an efficient legal system as a system of rules such that the Coase theorem can be applied in the presence of non-marginally low transaction costs without loosing its efficiency properties. The basic idea is that a legal system should be such that a potential plaintiff has no incentive to enforce the law by going to court. To analyze the consequences of different law systems, we split the paper into two parts. In the first part we start by summarizing the model of Schweizer (1988) on the Coase theorem as a kind of reference point. The advantage of Schweizer’s (1988) model is that his interpretation is seen as clear and thorough. Therefore, this model will be used to highlight the important properties of the Coase’s theorem.
MULTIFILE
During the coronavirus pandemic, the use of eHealth tools became increasingly demanded by patients and encouraged by the Dutch government. Yet, HBO health professionals demand clarity on what they can do, must do, and cannot do with the patients’ data when using digital healthcare provision and support. They often perceive the EU GDPR and its national application as obstacles to the use of eHealth due to strict health data processing requirements. They highlight the difficulty of keeping up with the changing rules and understanding how to apply them. Dutch initiatives to clarify the eHealth rules include the 2021 proposal of the wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg and the establishment of eHealth information and communication platforms for healthcare practitioners. The research explores whether these initiatives serve the needs of HBO health professionals. The following questions will be explored: - Do the currently applicable rules and the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg clarify what HBO health practitioners can do, must do, and cannot do with patients’ data? - Does the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg provide better clarity on the stakeholders who may access patients’ data? Does it ensure appropriate safeguards against the unauthorized use of such data? - Does the proposed wet Elektronische Gegevensuitwisseling in de Zorg clarify the EU GDPR requirements for HBO health professionals? - Do the eHealth information and communication platforms set up for healthcare professionals provide the information that HBO professionals need on data protection and privacy requirements stemming from the EU GDPR and from national law? How could such platforms be better adjusted to the HBO professionals’ information and communication needs? Methodology: Practice-oriented legal research, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions will be conducted. Results will be translated to solutions for HBO health professionals.
