Sentences with phrase «principle of the rule of law does»

Not exact matches

You can theorize all day long that we have other rules and laws... but for my moral guide in this life... Jesus principle of love will do just fine.

Space does not permit elucidation of the specific principles on which they worked, but it may suffice for our purpose to note that the law, the shari`a, as built up by the founders and generations of commentators, embraces all the rules of God's prescription for the conduct of men — domestic life, political and social activities, religious and ritual duties.

It does seem that the core of your argument relies upon the conclusion that popular rule trumps democratic principles, an idea that is historically and fundamentally in opposition to every principle of Britishness and the rule of law.

But I can not confidently predict how the judge will rule because this is a matter of state law that does not deal directly with church - state principles.

With EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's job now hanging in the balance, it is a good time to recall that, just after his Senate confirmation, he gave a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) that emphasized the three principles he said would stand at «the heart of how we do business at the EPA»: process, rule of law, and federalism.

By contrast, the view of the Advocate General (AG) appears much more in line with the traditional philosophy of mutual trust in the EU context: even if Member States have discretion about the means to execute the sentences delivered by their courts and even if EU law does not oblige a Member State to issue an EAW in order to prevent impunity, Advocate General Jääskinen recalls that «the principle that every penalty must be executed forms part of the rule of law» whose respect is a common feature to all the Member States of the Union (§ 102, referring to the opinion of the AG).

Thus, ensuring effective access to justice under the rule of law should not be done according to socialist principles but this means serious resource concerns.

-- that regulation does not preclude the application of a provision of national procedural law of a Member State which, with a view to avoiding situations of denial of justice, enables proceedings to be brought against, and in the absence of, a person whose domicile is unknown, if the court seised of the matter is satisfied, before giving a ruling in those proceedings, that all investigations required by the principles of diligence and good faith have been undertaken with a view to tracing the defendant.

As an entity devoted to the rule of law, it's not that the LSUC can't work to combat discrimination, it's that it has to do so in a manner that is lawful and consistent with its governing principles.

The most basic principle of the rule of law is that the state can not impose duties or exact sanctions without legal authority to do so.

For the Court, EU fundamental rights apply in principle, but do not have much impact in practice due to the rules of EU law at issue.

One of the key features of its mission and unifying nomophylactic essentially aimed at ensuring certainty in the interpretation of the law is the fact that, in principle, the current rules do not allow the Supreme Court to know the facts of a case unless they prove by deeds already obtained in proceedings in the pre-trial stages, and only to the extent that it is necessary to know in order to assess the remedies that the law allows you to use to motivate an application at the Court.

Incorporation of foreign and international rules and principles will require skills of synthesis and distinguishing that are distinct from traditional domestic legal reasoning, and they may require appreciation of important differences in foreign / international legal, political, or perhaps even cultural context.63 International legal rules often play a complex role in domestic law, presenting issues of interpretation and enforceability that do not easily fit within traditional domestic United States legislative, administrative, and judicial legal structures.64 Integration or application of rules from foreign nations may be even more complex, especially where those systems are substantially different from our own.65 Additionally, there may be discrepancies between the form and function of foreign or international law that affect their proper application.

«The petitioners seek relief on the basis that the production provisions of s. 26 of the LPA, when considered in light of common law statutory interpretation principles and in light of provisions of the Charter, do not apply to them,» said Butler, in the ruling.

Here, an argument familiar from the European level relating to the application and interpretation of the European Union's treaties could be made on the domestic level: that the Treaties have succeeded in creating a «new legal order» with its own self - contained conditions and principles, and that therefore the traditional rules of international law do not apply.

One of the key features of its mis - sion and unifying nomophylactic essentially aimed at ensuring cer - tainty in the interpretation of the law is the fact that, in principle, the current rules do not allow the Supreme Court to know the facts of a case unless they prove by deeds already obtained in pro- ceedings in the pre-trial stages, and only to the extent that it is necessary to know in order to assess the remedies that the law allows you to use to motivate an application at the Court.

In applying these principles to the analysis of transferable records, the Working Group concluded that it did not need to touch on substantive rules of law at all.

If he can not do this, because he is restricted to an extunc appreciation, the question arises whether he can rely on his procedural autonomy, or whether the EU - law principles of effectiveness and equivalence force him to apply the ex nunc - rule.

In doing so, the CJEU followed the viewpoint of the ICC, which had argued in its referring Order n. 24/2017 (English translation available here) that rules on the limitation period belong to substantive criminal law and thus fall under the scope of the principle of legality and its corollaries (p. 3).

The problem is simply stated as follows: Develop a principled approach to reconcile traditional accounts of the rule of law with the modern reality that administrative agencies and statutory tribunals who do not operate like or resemble the ordinary courts but who nevertheless occupy a large amount of space in our legal system and can not avoid making legal determinations in exercising their statutory duties which often implicate individual rights and interests to a greater extent than judicial decisions.

Accordingly, applying the principles of statutory interpretation, it is assume that Parliament did not intend to overrule the well - established rules of the common law when passing the Mental Capacity Act, in the absence of clear words or at least necessary implication.

For example, the Ontario Court of Appeal recently ruled in Bedford v Canada that the prohibition on common bawdy - houses for the purpose of prostitution was unconstitutional and must be struck down because the laws do not accord with the principles of fundamental justice enshrined in section 7 of the Charter.

[14] These «clearly established principles of law» do not emanate solely from precedential appellate decisions, but rather «can derive from a variety of legal sources, including recent controlling case law, rules of court, statutes, and constitutional law.»

Consequently, in interpreting Article 325 TFEU, the ECJ in accordance with the principle of the precedence of EU law imposed on national courts the obligation to disapply domestic rules that do not ensure the punishment of those guilty of «serious» fraud, achieving a substantial imprescriptibility (§ 52).

It criticises the application of vague principles and rules in a manner that effectively changes the law retrospectively, for example, the Data Protection Act 1998 requires that information be processed «fairly» but does not define this term, yet penalties for a breach are to be increased to 2 - 5 % of a company's global turnover.

In British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Christie, [2007] 1 S.C.R. 873, the SCC further examined the content of the constitutional principle of rule of law, and found that the rule of law did not support a general right to counsel.

This wording incorporates two important Community law principles which are explained further in the same judgment: «It is settled case law that in the absence of Community rules governing the matter it is for the domestic legal system of each member state to... lay down the detailed procedural rules governing actions for safeguarding rights which individuals derive from Community law, provided, however, that such rules are not less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (the principle of equivalence) and do not render virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law (the principle of effectiveness).»

I actually think the Rules of Court are minor drivers of costs compared to the increasing complexity of law / equity compared to 60 years ago and our treasured beliefs in certain principles that don't necessarily have rigorous research supporting them (cross-examination is the best way to truth; an independent bench means it is perfectly acceptable to have someone who practiced family law their entire career sit on a 6 week construction case).

OTOH I probably respect the request more if I DO have to write... The ABA Section of Business Law has pretty stringent rules for the originality and usefulness of materials — at least in principle — partly because the people who allow lawyers to claim CLE credit for the sessions look at the materials in deciding if the sessions qualify (again, at least in principle).

I do think, however, that the basic calculus on each is straightforward: for the name change, accuracy and accessibility to the public trump lawyer fondness of tradition 3 and, as for TWU and the Statement of Principles, the rule of law demands no less than a full - throated defence and pursuit of equality, diversity and inclusion.

So I am happy that the majority discusses the rule of law, even though it does not make that principle the main ground for its decision, and doesn't go as far as the I would have liked.

Likewise the (non) possibility for individuals to challenge regulations before the CJEU, the right of action (and rule of law) principle can not circumvene the Treaties: the issue is that the CJEU stated that judicial review on CFPS is a matter «within» the sphere of EU Treaties, so that MS (and EU Institutions) can not take action which may impact on them by using «outside» procedures; the rationale is the same used in other cases: if the matter is covered by EU law, absence of a specific rule in EU law does not enable MS (or the Institutions) to act: in the Advice on the Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction, the mere indirect effect of the Convention of the 44/2001 Regulation was considered sufficient to make the matter fall «wholly» within EU competence, thus depriving the MS of the power to act.

In this (rather delayed) post, I would like to explain why I think that Imperial Tobacco does not compel the decision the principle of the Rule of Law can not invalidate B.C.'s hearing fees.

If you have some resources, perhaps are a small business and don't want to take on a lawyer to run the whole case for you, you would be well advised to still invest in some advice, behind the scenes on your case, on key aspects of it such as the basis of your claim or defence in law, ensuring that your formal particulars of claim or defence contain the right legal principles and to gain an understanding of the key elements of the Civil procedure rules.

The new code states that a lawyer should know «general legal principles and procedures and the substantive law and procedure for the areas in which the lawyer practises» (Rule 2.01 (1)(a)-RRB-, but does not provide the 1995 code's explanation of what that means:

Therefore, the Criminal Code is not a true code, first enacted in 1892, and: (1) interpreted as the product of, and therefore bound by the previous law; (2) not comprehensive of the criminal law; (3) contains no statement of its purpose, or as to the approach and rules of interpretation applicable to it; and (4) does not state the law in terms of principles.