If «justice» is
the impartial application of the law to evidence in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness, the answer is obviously, No.
Not exact matches
Our judges and courts, each day, strive to ensure the fair,
impartial and independent administration
of justice so that each citizen is treated with respect, dignity and fairness, and receives a «fair shake» in the
application of our
laws.
And I retain an uneasy feeling that
law society benchers and members have decided based on their intuitions and perceptions about what discrimination is and looks like, rather than on the fair and
impartial application of a legal standard to a set
of facts.
Judicial decision - making provides five advantages not adequately provided by administrative agencies: (1) a clear and exact burden
of proof; (2) an opportunity to rigorously test the evidence for accuracy, integrity, and persuasiveness; (3) a thorough debate as to the correct interpretation and
application of the
law for the issues and evidence involved; (4) a decision by a truly
impartial and competent adjudicator; and, (5) the right to a jury trial, in situations allowed by
law.