Peer Review
General information
The conference submissions are subject to a double-blind peer review process by a minimum of two reviewers, under the coordination of the Scientific Committee.
Reviewers are members the conference’s international Scientific Committee and experts in fields specifically matching the conference topics.
The reviewers help the Scientific Committee select which papers to accept and reject. Additionally, the reviewers help the authors of papers make their papers and presentations stronger.
If it is necessary, the authors will receive recommendations to improve the quality of the paper’s content. If the observations or the recommendations are not kept, it is possible for the paper to be refused to be included in the conference.
Review Criteria
-
Relevance to conference – The conference promotes the development and dissemination of theoretical knowledge, conceptual research, and professional practice knowledge. While there are many related issues, papers on those issues should really only be included if they have some relevance to the conference scope and topics.
-
Originality – We place an emphasis on new work.
-
Clarity/Quality of Legal English – Even the best ideas provide little benefit if no one can understand them because of the way in which they are presented. We look for papers that are well organized and well written.
-
References – Papers show their value and their originality by grounding themselves in the literature. Ensure that the paper includes references appropriate for the kind of work. The theoretical studies should have larger reference list, small case studies might only need references to their theoretical underpinnings and one or two related studies.
-
Length of Paper – Conference papers have particular limits and benefits. You should consider whether the ideas are appropriate for the length (8-12 pages).
-
Comments & Feedback: To help the authors improve their proposal it is essential that every review includes some written comments too. Please give a written feedback to the authors (with a minimum of ten sentences).
Meet our members from the Scientific Committee
Brândușa ȘTEFĂNESCU
Professor PhD. at the Faculty of Law from the Bucharest University of Economic Studies
Silvia CRISTEA
Proffessor Phd. at the Faculty of Law from the Bucharest University of Economic Studies
Dejan Popovici
Professor Phd. at Faculty of Law, University of Belgrade
Daniel DEAK
Proffessor Phd. at the Faculty of Law from the Corvinus University, Budapest
Jacques MALHERBE
Professor Phd. at University Louvain-la-Neuve (UCL)
Radu BUFAN
Proffessor Phd. at the Faculty of Law from the West University of Timișoara