About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1 NLUJ L. Rev. 1 (2013)

handle is hein.journals/nlujlaw1 and id is 1 raw text is: Foreword Our dilemma is that we hate change and love it at the same time; what we really want isfor things to remain the same but get better. -Sydney J. Harris Having published Scholasticus successfully for a decade, National Law University, Jodhpur has now sought to bring about a new outlook to the flagship journal of the University, renamed as NLUJ Law Review. With one of its main aim being to increase student involvement, the journal seeks to maintain its earlier objective of becoming a formidable instrument in taking the standard of legal research in India up by several notches, while broadening its platform for legal discpurse. At a time when people's faith in the legislature and executive is dwindling and the country is looking to the judiciary to bring about some semblance of order in the society, we have decided to dedicate the maiden issue of this journal to the different perspectives on the role of judiciary. Various nuances of this issue have been discussed through the articles, notes and book reviews. The articles published in this edition discuss the reactions of judiciary to the contours of 'bolar exemption', taxing foreign investments, elements of Trias' in evidence law and the regulation of international commercial arbitration. The first article titled The Billion Dollar Saga: A Study of the Vodafone Judgment and Its Policy Implications' is about the Vodafone Judgment and discusses the recent judicial interventions with respect to tax laws in India. The distinction between tax evasion and tax avoidance is brought out by tracing the history of the issue from the McDowell and the Azadi Bacaho Andolan judgment to the recent Vodafone judgment. The next article 'Bolar Exemption Law in India: An Analysis in Light of Current Trends in Pharmaceutical Market' deals with the popular dichotomy of patent protection versus societal welfare in the pharmaceutical research industry. It brings to the fore the difficulty in achieving a balance between the two objectives in light of the 'bolar exemption'. Our third article is a study of the recent Bharat Aluminium judgment and discusses the trends and developments in the Indian legal system with respect to the jurisdiction of Indian Courts over international commercial arbitration held outside India. The last article analyses the evolution of the different tests of bias developed by the Courts both in India and the UK, and urges the Courts to develop some semblance of standardization.