Sentences with phrase «on judicial decision making»

I presented our paper on Judicial Decision Making and Stock Market Movements.

I think we have a very appropriate UChicago styled paper on Judicial Decision Making and Stock Market Movements.

Although the study showed that judges are less susceptible to the illusions of framing and the representativeness heuristic than lay people, the authors concluded that each of the five illusions had a significant impact on judicial decision making.

Not exact matches

JUDGING THE JUDGES Patrick McKinley Brennan's review «The Forms Behind the Laws» (April) begs fundamental questions of interpretation, blurs the distinction between legislating and judging, and proposes a mode of judicial interpretation that would, in its practical application, be indistinguishable from judges who make decisions based on personal preference.

Patrick Brennan replies: Upon reading Joseph Viviano's charges against me, I had to ask myself: Who is this Brennan that «proposes a mode of judicial interpretation that would, in its practical application, be indistinguishable from judges who make decisions based on preferences?»

Among them are the rights to: bullet joint parenting; bullet joint adoption; bullet joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents); bullet status as next - of - kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; bullet joint insurance policies for home, auto and health; bullet dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support; bullet immigration and residency for partners from other countries; bullet inheritance automatically in the absence of a will; bullet joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment; bullet inheritance of jointly - owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate); bullet benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare; bullet spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home; bullet veterans» discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns; bullet joint filing of customs claims when traveling; bullet wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children; bullet bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child; bullet decision - making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her; bullet crime victims» recovery benefits; bullet loss of consortium tort benefits; bullet domestic violence protection orders; bullet judicial protections and evidentiary immunity; bullet and more...

Unconscionable conduct (agrees with NFF that they have not provided protection and support reforms «to provide transparency in the supply chain» and recognise that «certain classes of suppliers... are predisposed to suffering from a special disadvantage...»; misuse of market power (legal framework must «level the balance of market power in negotiations...», «ensure transparency in the transmission of market prices» and «not allow for final market risks to be borne by the primary producer» and provide «transparency of contract processes» - specifically, Canegrowers supports effects test and a process giving ACCC greater power to «regulate anti-competitive behaviour and impose penalties», shifting «the decisions framework from the judicial system to a regulatory system» which would make it more accessible to small producers); collective bargaining (notes limits of Sugar Industry Act (Qld); authorisation and notification approval costly and limited and not a viable alternative - peak bodies should be able to «commence and progress collective bargaining with mills on behalf of their members» and current threshold too restrictive)» competitive neutrality (mixed outcomes - perverse outcomes in the case of natural monopolies - suggest remove «application of competitive neutrality provisions to natural monopoly essential services»)

A landmark judicial review that was set to shine a light on decisions made behind closed doors by regional schools commissioners has been settled out of court.

Requiring the Crown to weigh proportionality, the court says, «would greatly expand the scope of judicial review of discretionary decisions made by prosecutors and put at risk the adversarial nature of our criminal justice system by inviting judicial oversight of the numerous decisions that Crown prosecutors make on a daily basis.»

The way in which the Trial Chamber reacted to Alternate Judge Sow's decision to make a public statement on the Taylor Trial; the exclusion of his statement from the official transcript of the hearing; and the recent information suggesting irregularities in the process which the SCSL judges invoked to discipline their judicial colleague for alleged misconduct all underscore the need for greater transparency on this issue than we have so far received from the SCSL.

He has lectured in Canada and abroad on diverse legal topics, and has published on such subjects as judicial decision - making, Canada - US trade, the law of evidence and constitutional law.

Excerpts on the decision to publish and whether to issue summary affirmances might be helpful in training externs and clerks in a judicial opinion writing course to give the students background in some of the decisions judges must make in addition to how to decide cases and write the opinions.

(39) On an application for judicial review of the arbitrator's decision, no determination or selection that the arbitrator was required to make under subsection (29) shall be overturned unless the determination or selection was patently unreasonable.

In order to perform their duty effectively, lawyers research on laws, the intent of those laws and the judicial decisions that are relevant to their client's circumstance so as to make a knowledgeable decision.

The Library of Congress explains that, as a civil law country, Chinese judges make rulings based on statutes without deference to other court decisions — unlike the U.S. common law system, which is based on judicial interpretations.

The key is ensuring judicial officers consider in criminal (i.e., child abuse) and custody cases the broad range impact abuse has on children to make more informed decisions on placement, parenting time, and to protect children from further mistreatment from an abusive parent.

In recent years, there has been growing judicial emphasis on hearing and exploring the «voice» and «wishes and feelings» of the child when making decisions about their welfare.

Judge Your Judges, a project of public radio station WNYC in New York that will focus on enabling voters to make more knowledgeable decisions about New York judicial elections.

Two questions arose: (i) whether s 204 contained an express requirement under which the county court was required by an enactment to make a decision applying the principles that were applied by the court on an application for judicial review, thus placing s 204 appeals within the public law category; and (ii) if not, whether there were any other reasons requiring the application of judicial review principles with the result that s 204 appeals fell within the post-LASPO 2012 civil legal aid regime.

On the one hand, when the chips are down, ODR determinations will, in practice, differ very little from conventional judicial decision - making.

(3) An application for judicial review and any appeal from an order of the court on the application does not stay the decision made under this Act.

Making a decision based on the evidence, but without additionally requiring expert evidence, is not taking judicial notice.

When making a judicial determination on the allocation of litigation costs, two decisions fall to the deciding judge under Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 44.2: establishing which of the litigating parties is the «winner», and applying judicial discretion to determine any discounts or changes to awarded costs necessary to reflect elements of the case.

Lord Woolf arguably supplied a judicial tool - kit with many if not all of the tools required to make robust decisions on case management, including cutting cases down to size where appropriate.

While a tribunal's substantive decision - making under its home statute may survive a judicial review merely by being reasonable, a tribunal must still be correct about questions of general law, and must still reach decisions on a foundation of procedural fairness; legislatures do not authorize tribunals to decide matters through unjust processes (Dunsmuir at 128 - 129).

While judicial decisions rarely result in everyone being happy, our justice system is founded on a public confidence that decisions, whether popular or not, are fully heard and fairly made.

YLAL calls on the government to ensure that if the Magee report is implemented, the primary legislation ensures that the interests of justice are the primary consideration for policy decisions and that decision making for funding is subject to independent, judicial scrutiny.

Here we make reference in particular to the decision in the OMT / Gauweiler judgments (case C - 62 / 14 and judgment of 21.06.2016) and in the Dansk Industri / Ajos judgments (case C - 441 / 14 and decision n. 15/2014, unofficial English translation available here), and the judicial rebellion commented on by Sarmiento.

[1] This is an application brought by the applicant, Navjeen Kaberwal («Kaberwal»), for judicial review of a decision made by the Ministry of the Economy, Immigration Services («Ministry») on December 31, 2012 suspending Kaberwal's right to submit applications to the Ministry for a period of two years.

In R (Casey) v Restormel BC [2007] EWHC 2544 (admin), [2007] All ER (D) 96 (Nov) the claimant sought judicial review of the authority's decision not to review its decision of intentional homelessness on the basis that the request for the review had been made out of time.

«Reading the order, there is a strong inference that the Judicial Council made this decision on its own and did not consult the Third Circuit,» Hellman said.

(a) The Claimants» case on the point at the hearing was made by reference to a Dubai Court of Cassation decision (Central Bank of Sudan v Africa Alpha Capital 1 Co Ltd, Appeal no 480/2012 Commercial, where the defence was put forward that the court lacked jurisdiction under the Vienna and Riyadh Conventions because the Bank was a «public venture forming a part of the government entities of the Republic of Sudan that enjoys immunity from judicial proceedings and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the State Courts».

Key chapters and sections cover: • Decision - making, including personal interests, bias and determination, equality and discrimination and elections • The process for making and handling complaints on conduct issues • The challenging of authorities on conduct issues including through judicial review, the Ombudsman and by using Freedom of Information • Offences • The law in Wales

If the military tribunals have lawful authority to hear, decide, and condemn, their action is not subject to judicial review merely because they have made a wrong decision on disputed facts.

To illustrate the problem with accusing judges of bias, given the term's various meanings, the article focuses on recent federal litigation over NYC police stop - and - frisk policy in which (1) the district judge found «implicit bias» in police practices based on accumulated evidence and expert analysis, (2) the Second Circuit found that the district judge engaged in disqualifying judicial bias because of her comments in a prior related lawsuit and in the media, and (3) critics accused the Second Circuit of bias in making decisions that were hard to justify on either procedural or substantive grounds.

Although judicial factfinding in sentencing is standard and allowed since Booker made the guidelines nonmandatory, the judicial factfinding assumes an even greater role here given that the decision of even what basic guideline to apply hinges on what offense the judge finds is proven by the facts.

By validating and giving effect to that campaign — based entirely on what they had read in the newspapers — Judges Cabranes, Walker, and Parker openly permitted the norms of contemporary political discourse embodied in those news stories to displace the norms of reasoned judicial decision making, and unnecessarily inserted themselves into the mayoral election campaign.

The Law flows from two places, code sections which are voted on by the Georgia legislature and from stare decisis, over 200 years of appellate judicial decisions that make up the collective wisdom of the bench in interpreting the law in certain factual circumstances.

CaseBase's catchwords and digests make it easy to search for recent decisions and articles on a particular area of law, and for judicial consideration of legislation and words and phrases.

Other judges might not allow hearings on Petitions for Judicial Review and will make a decision based only on the briefs submitted.

This would include the passage of the NRTA and would thereby extend to all judicial decisions which have been made on the presumption of NRTA legitimacy.

Judicial Tribunal for the Dubai Courts and DIFC Courts awards Dubai Courts jurisdiction in «conduit» cases: The Judicial Tribunal for the Dubai Courts and the DIFC Courts, established in 2016 to rule on conflicts of jurisdiction and conflicts of judgments between the two courts, has issued two recent decisions in cases where claimants obtained an order from the DIFC Courts recognising arbitral awards made outside the DIFC, where there was no connection with the DIFC, and where the order recognising the award was referred for enforcement to the Dubai courts for enforcement against assets located there.

An application for judicial review must be filed within 15 days or 60 days of receiving the refusal, depending on whether the decision was made within Canada or outside of Canada respectively.

Additionally, a judicial clerk is exposed to a wide array of legal issues and is able to make a hands - on contribution to the judicial decision - making process.

Advising on judicial review challenges including on a challenge to the air quality impact assessment of the Hong Kong - Zhuhai Macau Bridge and advising a UK authority on a challenge to its procurement decision making.

The long title explains the result in Conseil des montagnais de Natashquan c. Malec, 2012 CF 1392, a case about alleged discrimination against Aboriginal educators.An initial decision unfavourable to the applicant was made, but quashed on judicial review.

It needs to explain the basis on which intervention decisions are made, and the function that interventions serve in judicial decision - making.

The puzzle of a representative judiciary is that many want a diverse bench because more varied experience will enhance judicial decision - making, and yet many worry about a representative judiciary precisely because it may mean judges will decide based on their identity or community affiliation rather than based on the facts and law before them.

The idea that environmental claims warrant different treatment arises principally from the UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision - making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the «Aarhus Convention»), which was ratified by the UK in 2005 and which includes the provision that «each Party shall ensure that... members of the public have access to administrative or judicial procedures to challenge acts and omissions by private persons and public authorities which contravene provisions of its national law relating to the environment.»

Shortly before the consultation date on November 28, 2013, I was advised that the College had received a letter suggesting that an application for judicial review would be made of a ratio review panel decision that I had chaired (which had issued over 6 months ago), on the basis of «a reasonable apprehension of bias».