When traveling via roads, we often look for cues to tell us where we are going. A sign every now and then telling us exactly where we are, and which directions lead to a particular destination. Imagine the colossal time it would take if none of the roads had any signposts, and neither did any maps. It would be impossible to travel anywhere. The same logic also applies to academic papers. When writing, we want to tell our readers exactly what to expect. Academic papers are different from works of fiction. We like having spoilers in the former. It is a good writing practice.

So, what is signposting in writing and how do we make use of them efficiently? Well, there are four types of signposts- thesis statements, paragraphs, topic sentences, and transitions. The thesis statement helps set out our conclusion for each issue and sub-issue Paragraphs are meant for discussing one idea or sub-issue. They are a group of sentences relating to those discrete ideas. A topic sentence summarizes our stance on that issue. We use a topic sentence to give our paragraph a direction and define its purpose. Now, these paragraphs might discuss different ideas. To connect these ideas and establish a flow, we make use of transitions. They show the relationship between these different ideas.

Therefore, by using these signposts we can convey our ideas efficiently to our readers. It is important to remember that writing also is a form of communication. While these concepts may be clear in our heads as writers who have engaged and worked upon them for long, they might not be as evident to our readers. Hence, using signposts helps our readers navigate smoothly through our papers.

The changing facets of creditors from secured and unsecured creditors to financial creditors, operational creditors and other creditors under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) have created a long debate on the position of Homebuyers or the allottees of the different Real estate projects.

In 2018, an amendment was made to the Code, wherein the definition of Financial Creditors under section 5(8) was made to include Homebuyers. In the case of Pioneer Urban Land, the constitutionality of the amendment was challenged majorly on two grounds:

a. Inclusion of Homebuyers/allotees as Financial Creditor is against Article 14 and 19(1)(g) read with article 19(6) and article 300A of the Constitution.

b. The Remedies provided to homebuyers, in RERA 2016 and Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is overlapping and inconsistent to the remedies provided under Code, 2016. It was also stated that RERA, 2016 is a special act dealing with the Real estate disputes in India and in case of any dispute regarding the same, special legislature should be given preference over general legislature.

The Court while upholding the constitutional validity of the 2018 amendment, held that the Real estate projects are majorly funded by the money received through allotment of the flats/ homes or the purchase/ investment made by different home buyers. So, the amount received by them has an effect of commercial borrowing on corporate debtor. Also, at the time of allotment, homebuyers comparatively tend to pay lower prices against the appraised value of flat/ home that they receive after the completion of the real estate project, with a view to include them under the ambit of "time value of money" as per section 5(8) of the Code, 2016.

The court also held that remedies available under the Code are alternative or additional remedies to the homebuyers or allottees. Thus, there needs to be a harmonious construction between the provisions of the RERA 2016, Consumer Protection Act 1986 and the Code, 2016. The Code and RERA operate in completely different spheres. The Code deals with a proceeding in rem, wherein the focus is the rehabilitation of the corporate debtor by means of a resolution plan, so that the corporate debtor may be pulled out of the woods and continue as a going concern, thus benefitting all the stakeholders involved. On the other hand, RERA protects the interests of the individual investor in real estate projects by requiring the promoter to strictly adhere to its provisions.

Climate change litigants often rely on constitutional law to have a definite and effective claim against government bodies. There is a rise in instances where people and activist groups have approached the courts to hold their governments accountable for mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change.

In the case of Urgenda Foundation v. The State of Netherlands (2015), the court accepted the claims raised by hundreds of citizens and the Urgenda foundation that the Dutch Government has a constitutional duty to protect its citizens from climate change.

In the same year, US witnessed a highly publicized case brought on by 21 young citizens against the US government and governmental bodies, Juliana v. United States of America (2015). The Plaintiffs in this ongoing case have argued that the US government has failed to protect the right to life, liberty, and property of the young people by promoting and subsidizing the use of fossil fuels despite knowing the effects of their continuous use. These cases have inspired similar lawsuits in other jurisdictions as well.

In India, environmentalists like M.C. Mehta have paved the way for climate change litigation and an overall awakening of the environmental conscience in the Indian populace. By way of public interest litigation, the Indian judiciary has given some landmark rulings on environmental protection. Through several judgements, the Indian Supreme Court has declared the right to a healthy environment as a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian constitution. It has, furthermore, also elucidated the importance of sustainable development and intergenerational equity. While these do not directly address climate change, they do deal with the ancillary concerns and the driving factors surrounding climate change.

While our changing climate will require more than court cases, these instances, if allowed, can help mobilize environmentally conscious citizens of earth.

Strange laws
 

When in Rome, Don't Keep a Goldfish in a Bowl!