Sentences with phrase «judicial precedents in»

Not exact matches

Legal precedents are only secondary in judicial decisions, what matters is the law itself.

The chances that choice will pass the test in these cases will vary according to the particular constitutional language, the local judicial precedents, and the composition of the state court at the time; but in every case there will be two commonalities of theory that are worth noting.

While I find the majority opinion in Brown disappointing and even more so the fact that its author was Scalia, in the end there is something for conservatives to take away from the case: a strong judicial precedent that new categories may not be added to the type of content not afforded full First Amendment protection.

Lincoln, in contrast, viewed judicial activism as illegitimate, judicial precedent as problematic, and judicial supremacy as despotic.

The judicial precedent for equal protection for federal laws is somewhat fuzzy as there is not equal protection clause specifically written as part of the fifth amendment, and the specific clause is only in reference to states in the fourteenth amendment.

This may seem counter intuitive, but the supreme court has made rulings that both houses can decide how to determine a quorum in U.S. vs Ballin so the chances of this ever changing is unlikely without a specific amendment or a fairly major change in judicial precedent.

In a petition by Civil Society Network Against Corruption, the group accused the judge of consistent refusal to abide by judicial precedents laid down by the apex court in granting orders and injunctions against the EFCIn a petition by Civil Society Network Against Corruption, the group accused the judge of consistent refusal to abide by judicial precedents laid down by the apex court in granting orders and injunctions against the EFCin granting orders and injunctions against the EFCC.

Recall that a Federal High Court in Abuja had taken its final decision on the corruption case involving Justice Ngwuta, pointing out that the prosecution in the Justice Ngwuta's case failed to comply with the condition precedent before bringing charges against a judicial officer.

In addition, the broad ban on unfair or deceptive acts has also led the way to a wealth of rules and regulations [FN50] and significant judicial precedent.

Public participation (described as access to information and judicial remedy, as well as participation in decision making) in development projects not only has legal precedent in international accords but also has been incorporated into the procedures of international lending organizations.

In Willers v Joyce & Anor (No 2) Lord Neuberger (at [7]-RRB- pointed out that, till 1966 Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent)[1966] 1 WLR 1234 the House of Lords were required to follow its own decisions.

Actually, if we're going to be technical: it's entirely worthless as precedent since there's no person lower on the Ontario judicial pecking order (unless things have changed in Ontario since the end of 2012) than a deputy judge of the small claims court.

These Court decisions make new law that are precedents in later judicial reviews.

The entire back - and - forth between Hewitt and Kerr — which is being conducted in a wonderfully professional tone, I'd like to note for the record — is a perfect example of why judicial precedent and the Constitution exist.

She posits that the literary artist's imagining can add to and be a part of judicial reasoning and that the constraints of precedent put needed boundaries around a judge's use of literary imagination and results in judicial neutrality.

Indeed, the Northern District of California recently issued a rule mandating the disclosure of TPLF in all class and representative actions, providing an important precedent for making the practice more transparent in that particular judicial district.

The judicial precedent of constitutional law has evolved through a process in which courts interpret, apply, and explain the meaning and context of particular provisions and principles of the constitution during a legal proceeding.

Many times, courts will lift string - cites and parentheticals from other judicial opinions, with a notation such as «cited in...» Is that plagiarism — or precedent?

Is this an example of our super constitutional status in action when neither the provincial gov» t, federal gov» t or the governor general care enough to execute, legislate or judicial protect and defend a constitutional precedent in the form of the Canada Crown (Her Majesty's Letters Patent)?

In 1819, a woman slave named Winny filed a lawsuit in St. Louis Circuit Court that would establish an important judicial precedenIn 1819, a woman slave named Winny filed a lawsuit in St. Louis Circuit Court that would establish an important judicial precedenin St. Louis Circuit Court that would establish an important judicial precedent.

Professor Elizabeth Judge explains in «Precedent and the Individual Opinion: Judges Judging Judgments and the Creation of the Law Canon», the act of «authorizing precedent... deflect [s] attention away from the judicial acts of authoring the individual opinioPrecedent and the Individual Opinion: Judges Judging Judgments and the Creation of the Law Canon», the act of «authorizing precedent... deflect [s] attention away from the judicial acts of authoring the individual opinioprecedent... deflect [s] attention away from the judicial acts of authoring the individual opinion».

In addition to the way the term is used above, «common law» can be used within a Common Law jurisdiction to distinguish that part of the law which arises from judicial precedent from that part which arises from legislative statute or administrative regulation.

What I said in relation to that was: «Over time, a minimalist approach to judicial decision making is likely to stultify the growth of the law and leave practitioners with a body of precedent that is very fact - oriented, giving little guidance to how future cases will be decided.»

And when the time comes to reassess whether a particular right is now found somewhere in the Charter, prior judicial precedent will invariably be disregarded where it has fallen out of fashion.

Cs made their claim and in doing so, relied upon the commentary in Volume 38 (2) of the Encyclopaedia of Forms & Precedents that states the inclusion of a «call - in» clause should at least be considered in any case other than: «the very simplest cases such as an application for change of use or for the carrying out of relatively minor building operations where... it is unlikely that the grant of planning permission would be challenged by third parties by way of judicial review....»

Mr. O'Sullivan is also correct to imply that, in a justice system where the content is based in part on «judicial civil precedent», on judges providing new solutions to new problems created by changes in society, a reduction in the number of decided cases, precedents, could be a problem.

Finally, although we do not have a justice of precedents, it is a fact that the volume of judicial disputes leads the Judges to create a base of decision criteria and it needs to be very well known by the law office to guarantee maximum performance in the defence of its clients.

The same is to be said of the other source of our law, judicial decisions and the reasons therefor, especially in the light of our system of precedent.

a Singapore company in obtaining, from the New Zealand courts, an order of subpoena in favour of a London LCIA tribunal, creating new judicial precedent

Mr. Sirota offers quite a bit to chew on in just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must generally apply the law as written and should work to foster stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedentin just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must generally apply the law as written and should work to foster stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedentIn applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedentin which courts should be permitted to overrule precedents.

Topics covered include the transition to the bench, ethical principles for justices of the peace and judicial conduct, the structure of the courts, the role of precedent in the common law; the adversarial system; onus and standards of proof; judicial independence and impartiality; and discrimination and harassment.

«Yet some lower courts have continually sought to invent new ways around this body of precedent intended to keep plaintiffs» lawyers from dragging corporate defendants across the country and forcing them to defend themselves in what ATRA calls «Judicial Hellholes.

As with judicial precedents developed under the former rules, I expect there will be some seemingly inconsistent judgements dealing with the issue of independent medical exams under the current rules and eventually the BC Court of Appeal will likely weigh in on the issue to bring some clarity to the law.

[18] Paragraph (d)(2) recognizes that a lawyer may provide legal services in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is not licensed when authorized to do so by federal or other law, which includes statute, court rule, executive regulation or judicial precedent.

As it is so drastic, and in the absence of a direct benefit to the child, judicial approval is unlikely, not least because it could set a precedent for every family with a severely disabled child.

But because of the judicial emergency, the Third Circuit's active judges are now playing a radically smaller than normal role in shaping its precedent: four out of the last five CA3 published opinions were issued by panels with a single active judge and two senior judges.

If the precedent sought by the KBA is upheld in this case then the jurisdictional authority of the KBA will be so broadly expanded then the justification for the existence of the Judicial Conduct Commission will be voided.

It is, arguably, a specific instance of the broader question of how the law ought to deal with unusual situations on which precedent is lacking; as I observed here, in a post prompted, in part, by prof. Magliocca's musings on the subject of judicial review of unusual statutes, that broader question is not an easy one.

The report gathers, in one place, existing standards and procedures, relevant judicial precedent, and the specific views of many defenders in communities around the country.

Stare decisis is also defended on the ground that it increases the «perceived integrity of the judicial process» by promoting the appearance of the rule of law.52 When courts cavalierly overrule their own precedent, they may reduce the public's confidence in the view that judges are constrained by the principles of law they espouse.53 However, granting binding precedential value to secret opinions fails to promote the appearance of the rule of law, precisely because these opinions are secret.

Moreover, the Supreme Court of Canada recently noted that a full analysis of the standard of review is necessary «if the relevant precedents appear to be inconsistent with recent developments in the common law principles of judicial review» (para. 48).

A classic is the following decision by Master Funduk explaining the concept of stare decisis (judicial precedent)(the «punchline» is in the last paragraph):

The patchwork nature of traffic - court decisions is creating a dangerous precedent in this area and I can only hope that we will see a judicial pronouncement by a criminal court judge in a well argued case soon.

Of course, in light of the current composition of the U.S. Senate and the current President, and the precedent that the «nuclear option» can abolish the filibuster for some kinds of judicial appointments (a parliamentary ruling which is almost surely not justiciable due to express language vesting procedural questions in the U.S. Senate in the Senate and not the courts in the U.S. Constitution), this question is unlikely to present itself any time soon.

Clearly, there are loopholes and voids that need filling in this market, and legislative development can take some time, relying mostly on judicial precedents.

The essence of judicial pragmatism, or at least my version of it, is recognition that difficult cases — and they are legion in our system — can not be resolved at the appellate level by a distinctive process of reasoning called «legal reasoning,» emphasizing careful parsing of text and scrupulous adherence to precedent and an analytical method that resembles deductive logic.

But because this report's constructive criticisms seem to fall largely on deaf ears in Sacramento and in many courthouses around the state, this year's look at the West Coast's perennial Judicial Hellhole will pragmatically limit its focus to an armful of the state's civil injustices, including precedent - defying state supreme court decisions, the Private Attorneys General Act, Prop 65, food and beverage litigation, innovator liability, the California Environmental Quality Act's impact on affordable housing, courts» expansions of public nuisance law and natural disaster - chasing personal injury lawyers, among others.

The outcome of the proceedings, however, would have a special significance in the entire judicial system, as it would be a primary precedent guiding the superior Courts dealing with electoral disputes at all levels58.

The bank asked that their appeal be heard because the issue of whether lenders who become owners of residential premises through a judicial process such as foreclosure are responsible for tenants» security deposits arises quite often and the RTDRS therefore had need of a precedent when faced with similar situations in the future.