Justice and Law Bulletin https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin <p>Justice and Law Bulletin (JLB) is published by Apricus Journals, an imprint of Apricus E-Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd.. It is a tri-annual, peer-reviewed, open-access Journal published in English. Published three times a year, the Justice and Law Bulletin brings out Book Reviews, Research Papers, Review Papers, Case Studies and Short Communications by scholars, academicians and professionals. The focus and scope of the Journal corresponds to all topics related to Law, Constitution and Jurisprudence.</p> <p> </p> en-US law@apricuspublishers.com (Apricus Journals, an imprint of Apricus E-Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd., B- 403, Aishwaryam, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201308, India) editorial@apricuspublishers.com (Apricus Journals, an imprint of Apricus E-Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd., B- 403, Aishwaryam, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201308, India) Thu, 18 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0000 OJS http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 Game of Shadows – An Unconstitutional Implementation of Discretionary Powers https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/157 <p>In the recent years, there have been a number of questionable rules and regulations made by the government, which though might seem unimportant on the surface, hold enough potential to corrode the democratic nature of the country from the inside, and leave it barren. Such instances may include financial controversies like that surrounding Adani-Hindenburg Row, PM Care Funds, or violation of Supreme Court judgements through ordinances and legislations like the Government of NCT Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023, or downright overuse of discretionary and legislative powers.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>This particular article sheds light on two situations which highlight the existing government’s nature to administer the country and various important positions unconstitutionally, namely –</p> <ol> <li>The Controversial Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022</li> <li>Controversial Extension of ED and CBI Directors</li> </ol> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> Mr. SK Sahil Copyright (c) 2024 Justice and Law Bulletin https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/157 Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0000 Exploring the Future: RBI’s release of a concept note on Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/172 <p><em>This paper aims to provide a comprehensive examination of the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) plan to establish the e-rupee as a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). With regard to the financial ecosystem, monetary policy framework, privacy concerns, and practical applications, the study intends to explore a variety of aspects, including technological foundations, design complexities, and wide-ranging implications. Upon examining these facets, the paper aims to provide significant perspectives on the revolutionary possibilities, obstacles, and tactical ramifications of the e-rupee within the framework of India's developing digital banking environment. Furthermore, it seeks to shed light on the prospective legal and economic ramifications steaming from the incorporation of CBDC, elucidating potential future scenarios and implications. Also, It aims to present the future implication that may arise due to CBDC, both legal and economical. Ultimately, this study contributes to the ongoing dialogue surrounding CBDC, providing stakeholders and policymakers with a nuanced understanding of the opportunities and challenges associated with this paradigm shift in monetary transaction. </em></p> Mr. Pritam Kumar Copyright (c) 2024 Justice and Law Bulletin https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/172 Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0000 In Context of Uber BV v. Aslam in London ([2021] WLR (D) 108): Do Uber Drivers Work for Uber as Employees or as Independent Contractors? https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/116 <p><em>The most contentious question has been whether taxi drivers are independent contractors or employees for a very long time. Cab drivers assert that they are covered by employment and labour rules since they are employees, but transportation network corporations like Uber and Lyft dispute this and assert that cab drivers are independent contractors. Why is it problematic to consider these cab drivers to be employees? The issue is that if a taxi driver strikes off a customer or bystander irresponsibly, the corporation will be held vicariously accountable for the damage. In some cases, victims of drivers' negligence have requested compensation from the firm, claiming that because the drivers are corporate employees, the company is vicariously accountable. The transport network corporations (TNCs) are unwilling to accept responsibility for their actions. The victims have occasionally taken TNCs to court to demand compensation from them despite the fact that they frequently deal with serious legal difficulties. The main goal is to debate whether a cab driver is an independent contractor or an employee. To understand this, it is important to talk about a few key ideas, like vicarious responsibility and where it stands in England and India. Following that, this essay will go over the obligations that transportation network firms have to their taxi drivers. Examining the TNCs' terms and conditions is crucial to comprehending the entire situation. You will see why there is so much contention between the TNC and the cab drivers after reading the terms and conditions. This article explains the interaction between TNCs and cab drivers using the example of one of the most popular TNC Uber business models</em></p> Dr. Monika Jain Copyright (c) 2024 Justice and Law Bulletin https://apricusjournals.com/index.php/jus-l-bulletin/article/view/116 Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0000