The recent evolution of the European Union’s regulatory framework on data, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and digital identity reveals a process of profound institutional transformation, one that goes far beyond the technical dimension of innovation to take on the characteristics of a true constitutional repositioning of the European legal order. Digitalization, far from being merely an instrumental phenomenon, becomes the ground on which the Union reaffirms its political and legal identity, defining a governance model capable of combining technological progress, the integrity of institutions, and the substantial protection of the human person. The result is an innovation law that is not peripheral to the fundamental architecture of the legal order, but is situated at its very center, as it is built on the quality of data, the transparency of algorithms, and public responsibility as an indispensable condition for democratic legitimacy. The set of recent interventions by the European Union constitutes a broad-reaching project, in which technological innovation, regulatory efficiency, and the protection of the individual are not placed in a dialectical or, much less, a conflicting relationship, but are integrated into a unified conception of digital development as an intrinsically value-driven process. Europe thus commits to building a model where technology does not operate as a factor of restriction of freedoms, but as a tool through which to more fully realize dignity, equality, and democratic participation. In this sense, digitalization is configured as the place where the capacity of the European legal order to govern its future is measured, while preserving the centrality of the individual and the solidity of institutions. This is the distinctive feature of the path taken: a modernity that advances not against the law, but through the law, and that finds in the rule of law, proportionality, and responsibility the means to ensure that technological progress remains, at all times, irreducibly Human.
Parametric coverage is meant to mutualize accident side effects by means of an index-based coverage. While parametric policies are valued as a market alternative to traditional damage insurances – in particular, from environmental catastrophes - doubts arose as to their capacity to manage civil liability risks.
Building Information Modelling (BIM) has significantly reshaped contractual practices in the construction sector, giving rise to new legal challenges in the contractual governance. Directive 2014/24/EU has promoted the use of BIM tools in public procurement, while Italy has progressively introduced mandatory BIM requirements, further strengthened in 2024. By contrast, the Albanian legal system still lacks explicit provisions governing BIM-based contracts. This paper examines the inadequacy of traditional rules of the Albanian Civil Code when applied to BIM contracts, highlighting the relevance of the Italian regulatory experience as a comparative model, concluding by offering aimed at supporting Albanian lawmakers in the development of a coherent civil-law framework for BIM.
Possiamo ormai distinguere due mondi: quello reale e quello digitale. Due spazi che seppur diversi si legano su di un piano che è quello relativo ai dati degli utenti, che sono diventati il nuovo bene, il nuovo valore di scambio. Proprio per questo però e per la loro capacità di influenzare il mercato sono anche diventati oggetto di attenzione e di riflessione, portando a valutare, anche quanto il loro utilizzo possa, all’opposto, confluire in un abuso ricollegabile al tema dei c.d. neuro diritti. Il saggio vuole focalizzare l’attenzione sui dai, sul loro utilizzo, sui rischi della società moderna e sulla possibile soluzione assicurativa che dovrebbe integrare la già presente assicurazione per la salute aggiungendo un profilo nuovo, più specifico per le applicazioni legate ai social media, al network, a tutte le possibili community in cui il legame si crea attraverso lo scambio di informazioni o la sinergia di attività digitali.
The development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems increasingly relies on the large-scale processing of personal data, including special categories of data, thereby raising significant data protection and privacy concerns for persons with disabilities. While AI-based technologies may enhance accessibility, autonomy, and social participation, data-intensive AI applications – particularly in healthcare, assistive technologies, and caregiving contexts – may also exacerbate existing vulnerabilities. Adopting an ex ante perspective, this contribution examines how the principles of data protection law interact with broader requirements of accessibility, non-discrimination, and respect for individual autonomy. Particular attention is devoted to the role of inclusive and representative datasets in AI training, as well as to the use of impact assessment mechanisms and the meaningful involvement of persons with disabilities in the design, deployment, and governance of AI systems.
