In the preface, the content of the given issue is described by the editor in the form of 5-6 line article descriptions (annotations). In addition to the latest changes to the journal, here is the explanation of the Latin phrase on the back cover.

Press publishers spend billions on producing quality journalism each year. While the costs of producing well supported, quality journalism manifest in producing the original content, i.e. the very first copy, further costs – due to digitization – are negligible. Parallel to this, prosperous business models thrive on re-using articles in press publications, as well as optimizing them for search and social media platforms attractive enough to generate huge amounts of advertising revenue. But not for the those who actually make the content. The European Union seeks to persuade large digital companies to take part in the financing of European content, mainly through competition law or by taking steps to improve the competitive position of European companies. The rules relating to press publishers of the EU Copyright Directive of 2019 intend to serve this purpose and will be analysed in this paper.

The agency-type organs have a history of several decades in the European Union. In the last few years there were two different tendencies leading towards the establishment of regulatory (or decentralised) agencies with strong powers, especially in the field of financial supervision. The first of these tendencies was the fall of the neoliberal dogma of the self-regulating market – as a consequence of the 2008 financial-economic crisis – which led to the priorities of the decision-makers being reset in favour of a stricter regulation than that of the New Public Management era. The other tendency was that the debate about a European administrative law started to live. The European Supervisory Authorities of the financial sector, which were established after the crisis, are regulatory agencies with strong powers. However, some of their competences are so strong, that it poses questions regarding the legal protection of the participants of the market. Moreover, the case-law related to their function seems to overwrite the accepted norms of delegation of competences within the institutional framework of the European Union.

The proper interpretation of the legal provisions in the field of tax law has high importance because it determines the opportunities of the taxpayers.  Taxpayers normally wish to pay as little tax as possible, in contrast, the tax authorities try to collect as much tax as, according to them, is still lawful. If a taxpayer makes an error in his legal interpretation, he has to face the legal consequences, that is why it is necessary to know the case law. In the English law and in the law of the United States, two fundamental approaches of the interpretation of tax law have emerged: according to the strict approach, the judicature has to scrutinize only the meaning of the words of the act and that is what determines the question of the tax burden. On the other hand, the other approach means that the purpose of the questionable transaction or the intention of the legislator shall be taken into consideration as well, but only in that case in which the application of the words would lead to an unreasonable result. This paper analyzes the relevant precedents of the United States, mentioning many examples and scrutinizes the theoretical bases and the application of the two approaches mentioned.

The collective agreement is a Janus-faced legal phenomenon. From one side it has the nature of a contractual relationship where the parties have the right to determine the content of the contract, also including the choice itself, whether they establish it or not. On the other hand, the collective agreement acts as a legal norm as well. From this aspect its regulations are also obligatory for those persons  who were not involved during the set-up process, or even for those who disagrees with some parts of the document. Therefore it is a crucial question in labour law as to how these contracts are handled by law. The Hungarian Labour Code came into force in 2012 contained an approach in which the legislator wanted to empower the legal status of collective agreement. To achieve this goal, in some parts the Act gives the parties the possibility to deviate from the law and to customize the norms in order to make it fit their current relationship. In this paper I examine the nature of the Collective Agreement and show its specialities in the Hungarian legal environment.

It is self-evident that parents play an irreplaceable role in the lives of their children, influencing the child's physical, mental, and emotional well-being and behavior. It is therefore necessary that children maintain personal relations and direct contact with each parent, even if the marriage of his/her parents is permanently and irreparably damaged. The right to contact, which has a strong legal foundation in international conventions, is traditionally described as a right of the child, despite the fact that contact between parent and child is both a right and obligation of mothers, fathers and children. The right to contact is a Janus-faced, complex legal institution: although it is largely based on the fundamental right to private and family life guaranteed by constitutional norms, it plays a significant role in private law disputes as well. The aim of this article is to present the place of the right to contact within the Hungarian legal regime, emphasizing the enforcement of this right in the field of protection of basic and personality rights.

Labour market situation of young mothers highly depends on the convergence of family and employment policies. Since 2010 there have been important changes in the Hungarian policies in order to stimulate fertility and to enhance the female employment rate. In our research we combined legal and sociological methodologies to analyse the effect of these policies. We argue that Hungarian policy has been in a serious uphill struggle to find a balance between two contradicting principles: providing sufficient family allowances and maintaining labour market flexibility by weak protection of employees. This dichotomy of principles has led to an unsustainable employment policy and made women more vulnerable in the labour market. We suggest that the differences would be reconciled through labour reforms, measures concerning working time arrangements, part time work and protection against dismissal have to be revisited along with protection of fathers with young children.

At first glance, the new book of András Koltay seems to be a translation of his recently published volume, New Media and Freedom of Expression: Rethinking the Constitutional Foundations of the Public Sphere (Hart International, 2019). Therefore, one would expect that the work itself does not provide any new information to those who already know the original in English. That could not be less true. As we get to the bottom of this false impression, the review shows the many virtues and minor mistakes of the book.

An annotated bibliography of recent Hungarian legal science books is published regularly (twice a year) in our journal. The annotation is a short, factual description of the usefulness of the book, which, in addition to bibliographic information, defines the genre and briefly outlines the subject matter and the results presented. The authors of the annotations are members of the Faculty of Law of the University of Debrecen (lecturers, PhD students or gradual students). The current issue presents the second part of the book descriptions of books published in 2017.