<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
The Indian insolvency regime has undergone a historic change with the introduction of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. This paper empirically analyses the effectiveness of the Code in the Indian economy. The paper also studies the insolvency frameworks that existed in India, the distinguishing features, and the legal framework of the Code. The analysis of the current status of the Indian insolvency regime with time series and cross-sectional data clarifies the non-performing assets trajectory, recovery rates, and time required under different recovery mechanisms, a summary of cases under the new Code and the status of India in the international insolvency systems. The empirical evidence of this study suggests that the Code is an improvement over its predecessors in terms of recovery rates, resolution of non-performing assets, and resolution costs. The Code should be subjected to necessary improvements to evolve and become a foolproof mechanism. Suggestions to that effect are offered in the final section.
</abstract>

On the Effectiveness of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Empirical Evidence From India

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) systems raises dilemmas regarding their moral and legal status. Can artificial intelligence possess moral status (significance)? And under what conditions? Can one speak of the dignity of artificial intelligence as the basis of its moral status? According to some authors, if there are entities who have the capacities on which the dignity of human beings is based, they would also possess intrinsic dignity. If dignity is not an exclusive feature of human beings, such status also could be recognised by artificial intelligence entities. The first part of the paper deals with the problem of moral status of artificial intelligence and the conditions that must be fulfilled for such a status to be recognised. A precondition for the existence of moral status of artificial intelligence is its ability to make autonomous decisions. This part of the paper considers whether developing autonomous AI is justified, or, as some authors suggest, the creation of AI agents capable of autonomous action should be avoided. The recognition of the moral status of artificial intelligence would reflect on its legal status. The second part of the paper deals with the question of justifiability of ascribing legal personhood to the AI agents. Under what conditions would recognition of legal personhood by the artificial intelligence be justified and should its legal subjectivity be recognised in full scope or only partially (by ascribing to the AI agents a “halfway-status,” as some authors suggest)? The current state of the legal regulation of artificial intelligence will be observed as well.
</abstract>

The Moral and Legal Status of Artificial Intelligence (Present Dilemmas and Future Challenges)

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
Industrial transformation is occurring now; the world is in the era of rapid industry movement into a collaborative robot (Cobot), empowering the human workforce, improving the project management processes, and optimizing manufacturing and supply chain procedures by utilizing the supercomputer and Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) capability. GenAI is advancing and gaining traction in various economic sectors and the routine operations of businesses and people. The Fourth Industry Revolution (Industry 4.0), which focused on technical innovation, efficiency, profitability, and quality (driven by information technology (IT) and automation), gradually gave way to the Fifth Industry Revolution (Industry 5.0), which built on Industry 4.0's achievements but placed a stronger emphasis on human wellbeing, and resilience environmental sustainability. Industry 5.0 carries more societal responsibility for human-centric matters while maintaining economic growth objectives, complementing the current Industry 4.0 and together creating what is called the “Techno-Social Revolution.” The role of GenAI is positive in project management and would generate tremendous benefits to project managers, especially in large data analysis, decision-making, and automation of processes, yet GenAI is probably faced with many legal arguments against its deployment. Some of these are accountability for errors and omissions, misguided actions, data privacy, and proprietary information security. However, implementing a governance policy of tracking and auditing processes on GenAI decisions would establish proper accountability and responsibility. Additionally, adopting a multi-layered strategy that involves extensive risk assessments, strong security implementation, ongoing monitoring, training, machine learning, and evaluation of GenAI outputs mitigates these issues. Close collaboration between project managers, IT, and cybersecurity in setting up best practices and rules for employing GenAI will mitigate the legal challenges. Lastly, being open and clear with stakeholders regarding the usage of GenAI and the security and privacy precautions adopted assists in reaching agreeable legal terms and conditions.
</abstract>

The Role of Generative AI in Managing Industry Projects: Transforming Industry 4.0 Into Industry 5.0 Driven Economy

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
This paper examines the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Law and offers some broad reflections on its current state. First, the paper introduces the concept of AI, paying particular attention to the distinction between hard and soft AI. Next, it considers how AI can be used to support (or replace!) legal work and legal reasoning. The paper goes on to explore applications of AI in the legal domain and concludes with some critical reflections on the use of AI in the legal context.
</abstract>

Reflections on the Use of AI in the Legal Domain

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
This paper argues that if we want a sustainable environment of desirable AI systems, we should aim not only at transparent, explainable, fair, lawful, and accountable algorithms, but we also should seek for “just” algorithms, that is, automated decision-making systems that include all the above-mentioned qualities (transparency, explainability, fairness, lawfulness, and accountability). This is possible through a practical “justification” statement and process (eventually derived from algorithmic impact assessment) through which the data controller proves, in practical ways, why the AI system is not unfair, not discriminatory, not obscure, not unlawful, etc. In other words, this justification (eventually derived from data protection impact assessment on the AI system) proves the legality of the system with respect to all data protection principles (fairness, lawfulness, transparency, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, storage limitation, integrity, and accountability). All these principles are necessary components of a broader concept of just algorithmic decision-making and is already required by the GDPR, in particular considering: the data protection principles (Article 5), the need to enable (meaningful) contestations of automated decisions (Article 22) and the need to assess the AI system necessity, proportionality and legality under the Data Protection Impact Assessment model framework. (Article 35).
</abstract>

“Just” Algorithms: Justification (Beyond Explanation) of Automated Decisions Under the General Data Protection Regulation

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
In an era where the transformation of knowledge into innovation and its successful commercialisation holds paramount significance, this paper explores how universities can turn their research into valuable products and impact the global market. It highlights the substantial impact of collaboration across different phases on innovative concepts, accentuating its influence on the quality of commercialisation. Data collection and market research findings indicate the pressing need for an efficient platform to facilitate collaborative endeavours. As a proposed solution, SCIONS encourages collaboration, sparks creativity, augments commercial prospects, and nurtures practical problem-solving. As a seamless, community-driven platform, it empowers academia to proffer scientific solutions to industry requirements and fosters a competitive marketplace for academic research solutions.
</abstract>

Fraunhofer Innovation Platform for Advanced Manufacturing at the University of Twente

Unlocking the Commercialisation Process for Academic Ideas and Their Global Market Impact

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
As digital trade continues to reshape the global economic landscape, the key objective of this study is to bridge a significant Legal-Technical gap characterised by the discord between rapid technological advancements and slower-evolving legal frameworks. This paper delves into the complexities of this gap and emphasises the need for a holistic approach to understand and address the multifaceted challenges it presents to businesses, policymakers, and the broader international trading system. This research offers a novel theoretical foundation for exploring and bridging the Legal-Technical gap in digital trade. Initially, it discusses the integration of legal and technical knowledge systems, which leads to the emergence of specific transdisciplinary knowledge as described by Andrew Sage's Theory of Systems. Subsequently, it explores the acquisition of universal knowledge about these systems through Herman Dooyeweerd's multi-aspectual philosophy. Furthermore, it proposes the development of a transdisciplinary knowledge representation using Fritz Zwicky's Morphological Method. Our analysis reveals that focusing on lingual, social, economic, and aesthetic aspects enables the prioritisation of critical factors essential for enhancing legal-technical functionality.
</abstract>

Teesside University International Business School, Campus Heart, Teesside University

Closing the Legal-Technical Gap in Digital Trade

From the Editorial Board

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
For more than half a century scenario planning has been part of the toolbox for many strategic planners. The usefulness of the scenario approach is emphasized in turbulent times, as the ones we are living at present. Besides having proven its role in traditional strategic decision making, scenario planning can create value for a number of different purposes. In this article we briefly describe the history of scenario planning and its application in the field of strategy. Our main contribution is in highlighting other application areas for scenarios, like innovation, leadership, branding etc. Scenarios are in our opinion an excellent method to create appreciation for alternatives. And, at best, they contribute to exploration and learning of strategic territories that the decision maker has not been paying attention to. From “thinking the unthinkable” we now use scenarios to spot opportunities and build road maps to preferable futures. A proper scenario process allows disagreement of potential developments become an asset for the organization, fostering a constructive strategic discussion. And uncertainty becomes a friend, not a risk.
</abstract>

Scenarios – the art of bringing the future into today’s decision making!

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
The importance of innovation has always been important for the economic growth and the quality of life of the humankind. But in the latest years the awareness of its importance is growing and has led to systematic study of the process and the characteristics of innovation. The paper is first giving an overview of the science of innovation, partly with the help of an innovation, the Artificial Intelligence. Then the paper focuses on differences in the level of innovation and tries to explain them by comparing innovative solutions to a well-known problem from the field of construction.
</abstract>

The innovativeness of innovations

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
AIs’ presence in and influence on human life is growing. AIs are seen more and more as autonomously acting agents, which creates a challenge to build ethics into their design. This paper defends the thesis that we need to equip AI with artificial conscience to make them capable of wise judgements. An argument is built in three steps. First, the concept of decision is presented, and second, the Asilomar Principles for AI development are analysed. It is then shown that to meet those principles AI needs the capability of passing moral judgements on right and wrong, of following that judgement, and of passing a meta-judgement on the correctness of a given moral judgement, which is a role of conscience. In classical philosophy, the ability to discover right and wrong and to stick to one's judgement of what is right action in given circumstances is called <italic>practical wisdom</italic>. The conclusion is that we should equip AI with artificial wisdom. Some problems stemming from ascribing moral agency to AIs are also indicated.
</abstract>

Morality in the AI World

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
These keynote lecture notes explore the potential and limitations of using algorithms and machine learning tools in the courtroom. It identifies different areas in which algorithms would be suitable for legal decision-making and areas in which human judgments should be preserved.
</abstract>

The Future of Judging: Algorithms in the Courtroom

<abstract>
<title style='display:none'>Abstract</title>
There is no area of human activity that would function today without the involvement of AI technologies. AI, a driving force of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, penetrates modern human life with ever-increasing intensity. As it is claimed, it brings about decision-making efficiency and performance accuracy that has never existed before. At the same time, artificial intelligence creates far-reaching dangers to almost every aspect of the modern world. From the legal point of view, the most eminent ones include: the bias stemming from the inherited historical data that AI tends to repeat and multiply, the problem of the lack of transparency (the “black-box society”) that makes it impossible for a human being to understand how AI arrived at a decision, and the elimination of the human being from the decision-making process, which rises the issue of appropriateness and legitimacy. AI can only be developed when sufficient amount of data is available, and hence the article elaborates on the fundamental role that data plays for the modern world, and how transnational corporations set global rules in relation to collection and access to data in a process that lacks democratic accountability and questions the position of states. The article ends with presenting the UE attempts to address the issues that arise in relation to the unrestricted access to data, invasion of privacy and threats posed by artificial intelligence. It also elaborates on the prominent position that the artificial intelligence holds on the EU political agenda and presents political and legislative actions undertaken by the European Union in this regard.
</abstract>

<italic>Homo ex machina.</italic> Artificial Intelligence in a Brave New World—A Glimpse from Europe

Editorial Policy

Instructions for Authors

Law and Business

 Law and Business is a peer-reviewed, fully open access online journal, that publishes research papers, reviews and news on a broad range of business law topics, including...

 Law and Business is a peer-reviewed, fully open access online journal, that publishes research papers, reviews and news on a broad range of...

Law and Business

Tous les volumes et éditions dans cette revue