INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

All research articles published INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

[1] Zahira Bibi Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, CriLJ 771, 2004.

[2] Zahira Bibi Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, CriLJ 771, 2004.

[3] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art14.

[6] The Law Commission of India, Witness Identity Protection and Witness Protection Programs (Law Com No.198, p.85, 2006.

[7] Ramesh and Others v. State of Haryana,1 S.C.C. 529, 2017.

[8] The Law Commission of India, Reforms in Judicial Administration, Law Com No, 14, p.687-689, 1958.

[9] The Law Commission of India, Reforms in Judicial Administration, Law Com No, 14, p.670, 1958.

[10] The Law Commission of India, “Indian Penal Code, 1971, Law Com No. 42, pp. 206-207.

[11] Ibid, p.207.

[12] The Law Commission of India, “The Code of Criminal Procedure”, Law Com No. 154, p.62, 1962.

[14] Law Commission of India, Witness Identity Protection and Witness Protection Programs(Law Com No. 198, 2006.

[15] Neelam Katara v. Union of India, ILR II Del. 377, 2003.

[16] Swaran Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 637, 1957.

[17] Zahira Bibi Sheikh v. State of Gujrat, CriLJ 771, 2004.

[19] Hira Nath Mishra v. Principal Rajendra Medical College, SC 1260, AIR 1973.

[20] National Human Rights Commission v. State of Gujarat, Writ Petition(s)(Criminal)No(s).109, 2003.

[21] Neelam Katara v. Union of India, ILR II Del. 377, 2003.

[22] Prem Chand v. State of NCT Delhi, SLP (Cr) No. 647, 2017.

3] “The Witness Protection Program in Selected Countries”, Public Safety Canada,10 July 2014, https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/rgnzd-crm-brf-43/index-en.aspx%3e

[24] Witness Security Reform Act 1982 ,18 US Code, s. 3521

[2] https://blog.ipleaders.in/cyber-law-vis-vis-net-banking-indian-sector/

[3] https://www.crn.in/columns/securing-modern-e-banking-services-for-banks/

[4] https://blog.ipleaders.in/cyber-law-vis-vis-net-banking-indian-sector/

[5] https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/199569901/?big=0&formInput=internet+ban king+fraud

[1] **Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer, What is ethics? 1, ISSUES IN ETHICS, II E, 1987.**

[2] MERKEL, JURISTISCHE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 34.

[3] Singer, Peter. "Ethics". Encyclopedia Britannica, 2 Feb. 2022, https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethics-philosophy. Accessed March28, 2022.

[4] STUDY LECTURE NOTES, http://studylecturenotes.com/what-is-ethics-relationship-between-jurisprudence-and-ethics. Accessed March 26, 2022.

[5] JULIUS STONE, LEGAL SYSTEM AND LAWYERS’ REASONING’S 16, (Stanford University Press, 1964).

[6] DR VD MAHAJAN, JURISPRUDENCE AND LEGAL THEORY 2, (Eastern Book Company, 1987).

[8] John Grier Hibben, The Relation of Ethics to Jurisprudence, Vol 4 , INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS, pp. 133 , (1894)

[9] The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights), No 40, Acts of Parliament, 2019 (India).

[10] National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India A.I.R. 2014 S.C. 1863.

[11] The Rights of Transgender Persons Bill 2014, (Rajya Sabha), XLIXC-C (2014).

[12] The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) 2019, Supra note at 9.

[13] National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, Supra note at 10.

[14] The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) 2019, §2(i), No. 40, Acts Of Parliament, 2019 (India).

[16] National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, Supra note at 10.

[1]M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law 907(Lexis Nexis, New Delhi, 8^thedn., 2018).

[2] Prof. G.S. Pande, Constitutional Law of India 248(University Book House, Jaipur, 14th edn.,2019).

[3] Will increasing marriage age to 21 help women?, available at:

⁴Raj, A., Saggurti, N., Balaiah, D., & Silverman, J. G. (2009). Prevalence of child marriage and its effect on fertility and fertility-control outcomes of young women in India: a cross-sectional, observational study. The lancet, 373(9678), 1883-1889.

⁵Gangopadhyay, J. (2021). Does an Increase in the Legal Age of Marriage for Women Guarantee Equality for Women in India?. J. Indian L. &Soc'y, 12, 23.

⁶Goli, S., Rammohan, A., & Singh, D. (2015).The effect of early marriages and early childbearing on women’s nutritional status in India. Maternal and child health journal, 19(8), 1864-1880.

[7]Paul, P. (2018). Maternal age at marriage and adverse pregnancy outcomes: findings from the India human development survey, 2011-2012. Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology, 31(6), 620-624.

[8] Linda J Waite (1981). Young Women’s Transition to Marriage. Demography 18 (4), 681-694.

[9] David M Fergusson, Lianne J Woodward (2000). Teenage Pregnancy and Female Educational Underachievement: A Prospective study of a New Zealand Birth cohort. Journal of Marriage and Family 62 (1), 147-161.

[10]Anita Raj, Niranjan Saggurti, Donta Balaiah, Jay G Silverman (2009). Prevalence of child marriage and its effect on fertility and fertility control outcomes of young women in India: a cross - sectional, observational study. The Lancet 373 (9678), 1883-1889.

[11]Judith A. Levine (2001). Academic and Behavioral Outcomes Among the Children of Young Mothers. Journal of Marriage and Family 63 (May 2001): 355–369.

[12]Mamta Rao, Law Relating To Women and Children 66 (Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 4^thedn., 2018).

[14]Balam Singh Aswal, Readings in Women’s and Girls’ Rights (Cyber Tech Publications, New Delhi, 1^stedn., 2014).

[15] R.A. Singh, Women’s Rights and Social Change (Centrum Press, New Delhi, 1^stedn., 2015)

[16]Early Childbearing can have severe consequences for adolescent girls, available at: https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-health/adolescent-health/ (visited on August 15, 2022).

[17] Ramesh Adhikari (2018). Child Marriage and Physical Violence: Results from a Nationally Representative Study in Nepal. Journal of health promotion vol. 6, June 2018.

[18] Impact of raising the Legal age of Marriage for women, available at: https://www.thehindubusinessline.com (last visited on August 15, 2022).

[19]Lalita Dhar Parihar, Women and Law: from impoverishment to empowerment- A Critique 413 (Eastern book company, New Delhi, 1^stedn., 2011).

[20]Dr.Madhu Gupta, Indian Law and Gender Inequality- Economic rights and Entitlements of women (Swastik Publication, Delhi, 1^stedn., 2016).

[1] Hugh F. Owen, The Negotiations of Lucknow Pact, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 31 No.3, (May 1972), pp. 562.

[3] The Lucknow Pact, Muslim League and Indian National Congress, December 1916.

[1]Business Standard, 2019. L&T has ‘acquired control’ of the company with 60.06% stake: Mindtree. [online] Available at:

[2]The Hindu, Idea cellular took over Vodafone, Vodafone Idea embark on new journey, unveil brand identity Vi, Lalatendu Mishra. [online] Available at:

[3]Mittal Steel took over Arcelor in 2006.

The Economic Times, 2016, Tale of two acquisitions: Mittal Steel's acquisition of Arcelor and Tata Steel's acquisition of Corus. [online]. Available at:

[4][4] Independent, Kraft Foods took over Cadbury in 2010, In a final betrayal of the Cadbury brand, Kraft has quietly abandoned its promise to stick with Fairtrade, Hannah Fern, [online] Available at:

[5]Mathew, Shaun, Hostile Takeovers in India: New Prospects, Challenges and Regulatory Opportunities (November 12, 2007). Columbia Business Law Review, Vol. 2007, No. 3, Available at SSRN:

[6]Bhandari, 2018.Escorts -Fending off hostile takeover, surviving family split. Business Standard. [online] Available at:

[7]Escorts Ltd. And Another vs Union of India and Others, 1987 57 CompCas 241 Bom

[8]Ninan, 1986. Supreme Court, RBI gives Swaraj Paul clean chit in Escorts, DCM share cases. [online]. Available at:

[9]Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) was abolished on 24 May 2017, as announced by Finance Minister ArunJaitley during 2017-2018 budget speech in Lok Sabha, and has been replaced by the Foreign Investment Facilitation Portal (FIFP).

[11]Lucian, Bebchuk, John ,Coates &Subramanian Journal of Financial Economics, 2006.Classified boards, firm value, and managerial entrenchment. [online]. Available at:

[13]National Bureau of Economic Research. The Powerful Anti-takeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence, and Policy. [online]. Available at:

[15]Companies Act 2013. Section 152(6) states as follows: “(a)Unless the articles provide for the retirement of all directors at every annual general meeting, not less than two- thirds of the total number of directors of a public company, or of a private company which is a subsidiary of a public company, shall-(i) be persons whose period of office is liable to determination by retirement of directors by rotation; and(ii) save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, be appointed by the company in general meeting.”

[16]Companies Act 2013. Section 169 on Removal of directors states as follows: “(1) A company may, by ordinary resolution, remove a director, not being a director appointed by the Tribunal under section 242, before the expiry of the period of his office after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard:

(2) A special notice shall be required of any resolution, to remove a director under this

Section, or to appoint somebody in place of a director so removed, at the meeting at which he is removed.

(3) On receipt of notice of a resolution to remove a director under this section, the company shall forthwith send a copy thereof to the director concerned, and the director, whether or not he is a member of the company, shall be entitled to be heard on the resolution at the meeting.”

[17]Barik, Nikhilesh, Takeover Defences and Corporate Governance (April 15, 2012). [online]. Available at

[18]Eleftheriadou, I. 2018. Hostile Takeovers and Defence Strategies

.International Hellenic University, [online], pp.20. [online]. Available at:

[19]The Guardian, White Knight. The Guardian. [online]. Available at:

[21]Business Standard, 2013, As M&A activity picks up, white knights are riding into India Inc. [online]. Available at: <https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/as-m-a-activity-picks-up-white-knights-are-riding-into-india-inc-110092800051_1.html >

[22]Business Standard, 2018, British American Tobacco proposal to buy back shares not an option: ITC. [online] Available at: <https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/british-american-tobacco-proposal-to-buy-back-shares-not-an-option-itc-118100700631_1.html>

[23]Dalal, 2020, Analysis of Takeover Defences and Hostile Takeover. NALSAR Law Review, 6(1), [online]. Available at:

[24] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011. Regulation 26(2) states as follows: “the target company by way of a special resolution by postal ballot is obtained, the board of directors of either the target company or any of its subsidiaries shall not, —(a) alienate any material assets whether by way of sale, lease, encumbrance or otherwise or enter into any agreement therefor outside the ordinary course of business; (b)effect any material borrowings outside the ordinary course of business;(c) issue or allot any authorised but unissued securities entitling the holder to voting rights…”

[25]Senior securities are those that ranks higher in terms of pay out ranking. The value of these securities is determined by the board of directors

[26]The Economic Times, 2020, Can India Inc. swallow the ‘poison pill’?. [online] Available at:

[27]McChesney, 1993. Transaction Costs and Corporate Greenmail: Theory, Empirics and a Mickey Mouse Case Study, Wiley, Managerial and Decision Economics. Special Issue: Transactions Costs Economics.

[29]Business Standard, 2019, Dalmia Firm & #39;S Stake In Gesco Up At 7.27%. [online]. Available at:

[30]Business Standard, 2019.Arun Bajoria At It Again, Buys 5.14% Bombay Dyeing Stake. [online] Available at: < https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/arun-bajoria-at-it-again-buys-5-14-bombay-dyeing-stake-101081401003_1.html>

[31]Michael Jensen, Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, in Patrick A. Gaughan, ed. Readings in Mergers and Acquisitions, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1994

[32]Companies Act 2013- Section197 (1) The total managerial remuneration payable by a public company, to its directors, including managing director and whole-time director, and its manager in respect of any financial year shall not exceed eleven per cent. of the net profits of that company for that financial year computed in the manner laid down in section 198 except that the remuneration of the directors shall not be deducted from the gross profits:

[33]Companies Act 2013. Section 202(1) for Compensation for loss of office of managing or whole-time director or manager states as follows: “(1) A company may make payment to a managing or whole-time director or manager, but not to any other director, by way of compensation for loss of office, or as consideration for retirement from office or in connection with such loss or retirement.”

[34]Companies Act 2013. Section 2(94) defines “whole-time director” to as follows: “includes a director in the whole-time employment of the company.”

[35]Companies Act 2013. Section 2 (53) defines “manager” to mean as follows: “an individual who, subject to the superintendence, control and direction of the Board of Directors, has the management of the whole, orsubstantially the whole, of the affairs of a company, and includes a director or any other person occupying the position of a manager, by whatever name called, whether under a contract of service or not”

[36]Companies Act 2013. Section 202 on Compensation for loss of office of managing or whole-time director or manager states as follows: “(3) Any payment made to a managing or whole-time director or manager in pursuance of sub-section (1) shall not exceed the remuneration which he would have earned if he had been in office for the remainder of his term or for three years, whichever is shorter, calculated on the basis of the average remuneration actually earned by him during a period of three years immediately preceding the date on which he ceased to hold office, or where he held the office for a lesser period than three years, during such period…”

[39]Mergers and Acquisitions, Alan Auerbach, Published in 1987 by University of Chicago Press by the National Bureau of Economic Research

[41]Companies Act, 2013. Section 180(1) states as follows “(1) The Board of Directors of a company shall exercise the following powers only with the consent of the company by a special resolution, namely:(a) To sell, lease or otherwise dispose of the whole or substantially the whole of the undertaking of the company or where the company owns more than one undertaking, of the whole or substantially the whole of any of such undertakings.”

[42]Annual Report 2018-19, L&T Infotech. [online]. Available at: <https://www.lntinfotech.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/LTI-AR-2019_web-version.pdf?pdf=download>

[43]The Economic Times, 2019, How Mindtree became the object of a hostile takeover battle between its management and L&T. [online]. Available at:<https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/ites/how-mindtree-became-the-object-of-a-hostile-takeover-battle-between-its-management-and-lt/articleshow/68490409.cms>

[44]Annual Report 2018-19, L&T Infotech. [online]. Available at: <https://www.lntinfotech.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/LTI-AR-2019_web-version.pdf?pdf=download>

[46]The Economic Times. L&T confident of taking control of Mindtree: AM Naik. [online].Available at:

[47]Vora K. Hostile takeovers and case of L&T Infotech and Mindtree, VORA Corporate Finance. [online]. Available at: <https://vorafin.com/insights/lt-infotechs-hostile-takeover-of-mindtree-and-theory/>

[48]Nishith Desai Associates, 2020, Don’t Mind: You’ve been Acquired! [online]. Available at:

[49]Post Open Offer Report. SEBI. [online]. Available at:

[50]Business Standard, 2019. What message is being sent to start-ups: Mindtree promoters to L&T. [online].Available at:< https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/what-message-is-being-sent-to-start-ups-mindtree-promoters-to-l-t-on-hostile-bid-119031900766_1.html>

[52]Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011. Regulation 3(1) on Substantial acquisition of shares or voting rights states as follows: “No acquirer shall acquire shares or voting rights in a target company which taken together with shares or voting rights, if any, held by him and by persons acting in concert with him in such target company, entitle them to exercise twenty-five per cent or more of the voting rights in such target company unless the acquirer makes a public announcement of an open offer for acquiring shares of such target company in accordance with these regulations.”

[54]Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011. Regulation 4 on Acquisition of control states as follows: “Irrespective of acquisition or holding of shares or voting rights in a target company, no acquirer shall acquire, directly or indirectly, control over such target company unless the acquirer makes a public announcement of an open offer for acquiring shares of such target company in accordance with these regulations.”

[55]Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011. Regulation 6(1) states as follows: “An acquirer, who together with persons acting in concert with him, holds shares or voting rights in a target company entitling them to exercise twenty five per cent or more but less than the maximum permissible non-public shareholding, shall be entitled to voluntarily make a public announcement of an open offer for acquiring shares in accordance with these regulations, subject to their aggregate shareholding after completion of the open offer not exceeding the maximum permissible non-public shareholding.”

[57]The Hindu, And so, after all the drama, L&T now owns Mindtree. [online]. Available at: <https://www.thehindu.com/business/and-so-after-all-the-drama-lt-now-owns Mindtree/article28191284.ece>

^{^[1]} Kyle Peterdy, Corporate Governance, Corporate Finance Institute (August 14,2022), https://corporatefinanceinstiute.com/resources/knowledge/other/corporate-governance/

^{^[2]} CFI Team, Top Accounting Scandals, Corporate Finance Institute (January 30, 2022),https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/top-accounting-scandals/

^{^[3]}Arti Bhatt, Waste Management Scandal, 1998, The Company Ninja (2019),https://thecompany.ninja/waste-management-scandal/#Aftermath

^{^[4]}Aron Almeida, Vijay Mallya Scam Demystified, Trade Brains (October 14, 2021),https://tradebrains.in/vijay-mallya-scam/

^{^[5]} Anushka Agarwal, 9 Major Corporate Frauds in India, The Company Ninja (2019),https://thecompany.ninja/9-major-corporate-frauds-in-india/

^{^[6]} Kshitij Bhargava, What is Antrix-Devas case? All you need to know about decade-long legal tussle between India and a startup, Financial Express (January 18, 2022),https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.financialexpress.com/industry/what-is-antrix-devas-case-all-you-need-to-know-about-decade-long-legal-tussle-between-india-and-a-startup/2409744/lite/

^{^[7]} Bisacre, Josephine, and Claire McFadzean. Company Law Essentials. Edinburgh University Press, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctvxcrkr2.

^{^[8]}Devas Multimedia Private Limited vs. Antrix Corporation Limited, Civil Appeal No. 5766 of 2021 (Ind.)

^{^[9]}Institute of Chartered Accountants vs P.K. Mukherjee (1968) SC 1104 (Ind.)

^{^[10]}Hindustan Lever Employees’ Union vs Hindustan Lever Ltd (1995) 83 Com Cases 30 (Ind.)

[1] Prof. PSA Pillai, Criminal Law,12th Edition/PSA Pillai Criminal Law 2014/CHAPTER 1 Nature of Crime CHAPTER 1 Nature of Crime, https://old.amu.ac.in/emp/studym/99998340..PDF

[3] Rit Foundation v. The Union of India, W.P. (C) No.284/2015, https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/written-submission-407338.pdf

[4] Section 3 of the The Domestic Violence Act of 2005

[5] Independent Thought v. Union of India, National Commission for Women, WP (C) 382/2013

[7] Exception 2 of the Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code

[8] Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2017) 6 SCC 1.

[9] Law Commission of India, Reviews of Rape Laws: Some Suggestions, Report No.172

[10] Nazrin Bano, Marital rape in India, https://blog.ipleaders.in/marital-rape-in-india/

[11] World Health Organization, Understanding and addressing violence against women

[12] R v R (Rape: marital exemption), [1991] 4 All ER 481

[13] 52 countries criminalised marital rape, HC told, https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/52-countries-criminalised-marital-rape-hc-told-118010201102_1.html

[14] R v L, (1991) 174 CLR 379 & R v J, (2011) 2 SCR 40

[15] Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors, (2017) 10 SCC 1

[16] Saroj Rani v Sudarshan Kumar Chadha, 1984 AIR 1562

[17] Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration, (2009) 14 SCR 989, (2009) 9 SCC 1

[18] Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC, 273

[19] The Chairman, Railway Board v Chandrima Das, (2000) 2 SCC 465

[20] Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, 1996 SCC (1) 490

[21] Kharak Singh v. State of U.P, 1964 SCR (1) 332

[22] Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh,1975 SCR (3) 946

[24] Vishakha v State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241

[25] Sohini Goswami, Sex between married couple not marital rape even if by force: Chhattisgarh HC, https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/sex-between-married-couple-not-marital-rape-even-if-by-force-chhattisgarh-hc-101629970181481.html

[27] Mr.Hrishikesh Sahoo V. State Of Karnataka By Women Police Station, Writ Petition No.48367 Of 2018, https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/judgements/WP48367-18-23-03-2022.pdf

[28] Francis Corallie Muin v. Union Territory of Delhi, AIR [1981] SC 802

IJLRA	N. Raj Kumar ; Kamble Shivadayal . "Design of Fault Tolerance Parallel FFT’s Using Xilinx 14.5v" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals Volume 5 Issue 8 2022 Page 1-6
IEEE	N. Raj Kumar ; Kamble Shivadayal . "Design of Fault Tolerance Parallel FFT’s Using Xilinx 14.5v" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, 5(8)

Victimization At Work: Atrocities Towards Victims By Their Superiorem (By-ATHIRA.A & PREETHI.S)

THE NEED FOR WITNESS PROTECTION IN CRIMINAL TRIALS: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE (By: Sunidhi Singh B J)

The Net Misdemeanor On Banknotes (By-Milan Donson)

Ethics and Jurisprudence With special reference to The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 (By-Aayat Fatma)

AUGUMENT OF NUPTIAL EPOCH - CALLS FOR THE MODERN ERA (By-Adisha P Alexander, Anna Alphonsa James & Sona Benny)

The 106-Year-Old Paradox, Lucknow Pact, A Compromise Of Disparity In Unity? (By-Dibya Prakash Lahiri)

JURISTROCRACY ON THE FACET OF CONSTITUTIONALISM & BUREAUCRACY (By-Nimisha Shaswat & Dr. Amita Arora)

DEFENSIVE TACTICS VIS A VIS HOSTILE TAKEOVER: AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE (By-Rukhsaar Dhaliwal & Vanshika Tuteja)

FRAUD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE : UNFOLDING THE SCANDALS WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO DEVAS-ANTRIX CASE (By-Tushti Ratnapriya Thakur)

MARITAL RAPE (By-Pooja Lakshmi)

LAW JOURNAL

IMPORTANT LINKS

ETHICS & POLICY

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

[1] Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer, What is ethics? 1, ISSUES IN ETHICS, II E, 1987.

[2] MERKEL, JURISTISCHE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 34.

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation 2

[1] **Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer, What is ethics? 1, ISSUES IN ETHICS, II E, 1987.**