Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  PUBLIC INTEREST
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
One of the most interesting topics from Smith’s thinking is his thesis about harmony of self-interests with public interest. According to this thesis individual acting will be helpful to whole of society. How should we understand this claim, when Smith connects it with self-love and egoism? The paper shows that understanding of this claim needs wider ethical and social background. First, Smith’s political economy is narrowly connected with his theory of moral sentiments. Second, validity of the Smith’s thesis is dependent on existence of some institutions of society, especially justice and positive law. Only these assumptions give meaningful to this thesis.
EN
A public service is a service which is provided by government or public sector to citizens. Main definition of public service is that it is a service in the public interest. It means that everyone who provides a public service must act in public interest and no in self-interest. Nevertheless the term “public interest” is necessary for the definition of “public service”, it doesn’t have exact meaning, which is important not only in law and politics but in ethics too. In this study ethical relevance of term “public interest” in connection with ethics in public service is showed. This study analyses conversions of “public interest” in history of social-political thought which can help its understanding in contemporary philosophy and public policy. The analysis shows that the term “public interest” is very complicated, dependent on social-political conditions of state and therefore it needs ethical expertise in every situation which is connected with providing of public service.
EN
The submitted work has the ambition to get involved in the present discourse of education in the area of neoliberalism. Referring to the works of J. Habermas, the work attempts to present the topical nature of the legacy of this German sociologist and philosopher in the outlines discourse of neoliberal education. The work also focuses on aspects of the discourse in the form of issues related to marketization and public interest in education. The work also attempts to map and confront opinions of current authors concerning applicability of Habermas’s ideas in the given discourse.
EN
The aim of this paper is first, to point out, in our opinion incorrect, author-centric wave of restrictivism concerning the interpretation of copyright exceptions and limitations, and also illustrate its conflict with public interest in the copyright law. Second aim is to illuminate several existing internal and external legal instruments that can help the courts to rectify lot of these conflicting situations and thus defend the public interest. Third and last aim is to propose, within current Union law framework, the most flexible provisions for expected new Slovak Copyright Act.
EN
The submitted work has the ambition to get involved in the present discourse of education in the area of neoliberalism. Referring to the work of J. Habermas Wozu noch Philosophie?, the work attempts to present the topical nature of the legacy of this German sociologist and philosopher in the outlines discourse of neoliberal education. The work also attempts to map and confront opinions of current authors concerning applicability of Habermas’s ideas in the given discourse. The work also focuses on aspects of the discourse in the form of issues related to marketization and public interest in education.
EN
Protection of fundamental rights of the competition actors acquires increasing significance mainly in connection with dawn raids in business premises of undertakings applied as an effective tool in detection of anticompetitive behaviour. Need to balance public interest on protection of competition with legitimate rights of undertakings bring o lot of problems and open questions. Especially the courts both on European and national level are confronted with the problem of conflicting interests. The article is therefore focused on case law of the ECHR, the EU and Slovak courts.
EN
Freedom of expression is protected by Article 10 of the European convention of human rights and also by Article 26 of the Constitution of Slovak Republic. The Constitution, as well as the Convention, sets limits upon which freedom of expression can be restricted. However, journalists and mass media have a privileged position from these restrictions, especially when reporting matters of public interest. Journalists have a social obligation to provide information and ideas on all matters of public interest and the public is entitled to receive such information. Journalists are even allowed to use some degree of exaggeration and provocation. In Slovakia we can observe that public persons, for example politicians or judges, take action against the media for alleged damage to their reputation and honour by publication of false information, unreasonable criticism or even the publication of their cartoons. Slovakian courts often decide in favour of public figures and media have to pay these persons high financial compensations. In this article the author examines approach of Slovakian courts in comparison with decisions of Constitutional court of Slovak Republic, Czech Republic and the European court of human rights.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.