Not exact matches
Metuh, through Adegboruwa, sought a declaration that his detention by the EFCC without
access to his family and lawyer, and without being charged
to court, amounted
to a violation
of his
fundamental rights guaranteed under sections 33, 34, 35, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44
of the Constitution.
Over 40 years ago, California's Supreme
Court recognized that a child's
access to an adequate education — regardless
of race, ethnicity or wealth — is a
fundamental right of the highest order.
In a significant win for
access to justice in environmental matters, the
Court's Grand Chamber found that Article 47
of the Charter
of Fundamental Rights (the right to an effective remedy), read together with the Aarhus Convention, precluded the application of national procedural rules allowing for swift decision - making at the expense of rights granted to environmental
Rights (the
right to an effective remedy), read together with the Aarhus Convention, precluded the application
of national procedural rules allowing for swift decision - making at the expense
of rights granted to environmental
rights granted
to environmental NGOs.
Delivering judgment along with Mr Justice Holgate, Lord Justice Singh said Part 4 was incompatible with
fundamental rights in EU law because «
access to retained data is not limited
to the purpose
of combating «serious crime»» and «
access to retained data is not subject
to prior review by a
court or an independent administrative body».
«Alberta
Court Concludes That
Access to Internet Is
Fundamental Part
of Right to Counsel Main Who is the Legal Profession's Equivalent
of «Florida Man»?»
«Grading Loophole Leads
to Boycott
of Final Exam, «A's for All Students Main Alberta
Court Concludes That
Access to Internet Is
Fundamental Part
of Right to Counsel»
Although the Supreme
Court of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the popula
Court of Canada held in Christie that a «general
access to legal services in relation
to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the popula
court and tribunal proceedings dealing with
rights and obligations» is not a
fundamental aspect
of the rule
of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control
of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost
to a large majority
of the population.
The ECJ's decision followed the opinion
of an advocate - general that the
right of access to a national
court was a
fundamental right under EU law and denial
of such
right would be contrary
to the
right to effective judicial protection.
In our view, it is difficult
to reconcile the Supreme
Court of Canada's 1988 decision in BCGEU v. British Columbia (Attorney General), confirming that every Canadian citizen has the fundamental right to unimpeded access to the courts, with the notion of Canada's superior courts operating as a default user - pay system of justice, subject to an individual establishing an entitlement to an exemption from court
Court of Canada's 1988 decision in BCGEU v. British Columbia (Attorney General), confirming that every Canadian citizen has the
fundamental right to unimpeded
access to the
courts, with the notion
of Canada's superior
courts operating as a default user - pay system
of justice, subject
to an individual establishing an entitlement
to an exemption from
court court fees.
Likewise, the
Court observes that legislation not providing for any possibility for an individual
to pursue legal remedies in order
to have
access to personal data relating
to him, or
to obtain the rectification or erasure
of such data, compromises the essence
of the
fundamental right to effective judicial protection, the existence
of such a possibility being inherent in the existence
of the rule
of law.
While the
Court stopped short
of conferring a freestanding constitutional
right to healthcare, it stated that s. 7
of the Charter (which provides that everyone has the
right to life, liberty and security
of the person and the
right not
to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles
of fundamental justice) confers a
right to equitable
access to medical services legally available in Ontario.
But a different argument, advanced by the West Coast Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, was
to the effect that the
right of access to courts was a component
of the
right to liberty, and maybe also
of that
to the security
of the person, protected by section 7
of the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms, and that the hearing fees infringed this
right contrary
to principles
of fundamental justice, due
to their disproportionate effect on women and the least well - off.
This publication explores the impact
of procedural provisions inserted in EU
fundamental rights legislation (in particular non-discrimination law) that are aimed at facilitating
access to court in support or on behalf
of...
While traditional law in Northern Australia recognises an exclusive
right of access to particular areas
of sea country by its owners, the High
Court denied recognition
of this
right on the basis that it was inconsistent with two
fundamental tenets
of the non-Indigenous legal system: the
right of innocent passage and the public
right to fish.