Urgent Relief in Italian Civil Procedure

1985 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 456-461
Author(s):  
Federico Carpi

Urgent relief imposes two basic requirements which influence both the procedure and the structure of the trial in which it is applied: avoiding prejudice and, in order to avoid prejudice, deviating from the general rules of procedure.As Calamandrei rightly noted in his fundamental work of 1936 (recently reprinted), the duration of the ordinary suit can lead to the danger that measures taken will be both useless and tardy. This is not a new viewpoint: it was a valid dictum in the Roman trial that “Si periculum est in mora, receditur a regulis iuris communis”.The thing which is new in our times is the consciousness in democratic legal systems that the judicial protection of rights and legitimate interests is not effective unless it is quickly obtainable. This observation applies to ordinary commercial rights, but above all it applies to non-commercial ones, for example rights of the person and his liberty. In other words, the time factor has become a vital one in guaranteeing and effecting access to justice.It is well known that the United States Constitution establishes the right to a speedy trial. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights similarly states that everyone has the right to have his case decided “dans un d61ai raisonable”.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-305
Author(s):  
Delano Cole van der Linde

In terms of section 10(3) of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 (“POCA”), a court may impose an aggravated sentence on a criminal offender if the offender was a gang member at the time of the commission of a crime. The court is entitled to apply section 10(3) to the sentencing of any common-law or statutory offence, save for the gang-related offences in Chapter 4 of POCA. As aggravated punishment is attached directly to a person’s status as a gang member, one must question whether such aggravated punishment does not violate the right to freedom of association in section 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Section 18 is an unqualified right and subject only to the limitations clause under section 36 of the Constitution. The purpose of this contribution is to investigate whether the associational freedom guaranteed by the Constitution may be limited in light of considerations under international law (such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) as well as foreign law (specifically the United States and Germany). The consensus is, broadly speaking, that persons are nondeserving of associational protection where the conduct connected to such an association is criminal in nature. Increased criminal consequences are justifiable where a person’s unlawful conduct is also connected to their status and activity as a member of a criminal organisation. However, increased criminal consequences based merely on a person’s membership of a criminal organisation, as is the case in terms of section 10(3) of POCA, is considered arbitrary and irrational. The conclusion is that section 10(3) of POCA should be amended so that it applies only to crimes that are related to a convicted person’s gang-related activities.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 353-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Hilson

Abstract The aim of this chapter is to provide an initial attempt at analysis of the place of risk within the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and, where appropriate, the Commission, focusing on the related issues of public concern and perception of risk and how the ECHR dispute bodies have addressed these. It will argue that, for quite some time, the Court has tended to adopt a particular, liberal conception of risk in which it stresses the right of applicants to be provided with information on risk to enable them to make effective choices. Historically, where public concerns in relation to particular risks are greater than those of scientific experts—nuclear radiation being the prime example in the case law—the Court has adopted a particularly restrictive approach, stressing the need for risk to be ‘imminent’ in order to engage the relevant Convention protections. However, more recently, there have been emerging but as yet still rather undeveloped signs of the Court adopting a more sensitive approach to risk. One possible explanation for this lies in the Court’s growing awareness of and reference to the Aarhus Convention. What we have yet to see—because there has not yet been a recent, post-Aarhus example involving such facts—is a case where no imminent risk is evident. Nevertheless, the chapter concludes that the Court’s old-style approach to public concern in such cases, in which it rode roughshod over rights to judicial review, is out of line with the third, access to justice limb of Aarhus.


Author(s):  
V.V. Berch

The article is devoted to the consideration of the constitutional right to a trial by a jury, as well as the right to a speedy trial in accordance with the provisions of the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution. It is noted that as of today in Ukraine there is a question of ensuring the actual (real) participation of the people in the administration of justice and the creation of an appropriate mechanism for the realization of such a right of the people. It is established that the permanent evolution of the jury trial in the world as a full-fledged element of participatory democracy allows us to assert the possibility of applying the best foreign experience in this area and for Ukraine. It is noted that the jury trial, which is typical for the United States, is undoubtedly a consequence of the borrowing of English legal customs, but has its own special features. It has been established that the right to a speedy trial should be distinguished from other constitutional rights, as it concerns the interests of society and the justice system more than the interests of the accused. The circumstances that suggest whether a trial is in fact "fast" are rather vague, as each such proceeding is to some extent unique. The requirements for members of the jury are set out in the Jury Selection Act. It is noted that the release of jurors varies depending on the state. One of the grounds for such dismissal is professional activity. For example, doctors, lawyers, public figures, police or firefighters. At the same time, this practice is gradually ceasing to be natural. It is concluded that the jury trial as a form of public participation in the administration of justice is undoubtedly a democratic legal institution. Direct democracy in the exercise of judicial power, which is carried out in compliance with the principles of publicity and adversarial proceedings promotes the establishment of citizens' faith in the fairness of judicial decisions.  


Author(s):  
O.I. Tyshchenko

The article reveals the problem of appealing against the decision of the investigating judge, the court on sending a person to a medical institution for a psychiatric assessment, in particular: a) it is stated that sending a person to a medical institution for assessment is a form of restriction of his or her constitutional right to liberty, which is equivalent to detention. It is proposed to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter – the CPC), which provides for the right to a separate appeal against a court decision on sending a person to a medical institution for assessment, decided in court before the court decision on the merits. The lack of possibility to appeal against such a court decision creates a potential danger of illegal restriction of a person’s constitutional right to liberty and security during their placement in a medical institution for the inpatient forensic psychiatric assessment (hereinafter – the IFPA), which violates the essence of the right to judicial protection; b) it is proved that the decision of the investigating judge, the court to send a person to a medical institution for the IFPA may limit not only the rights of the suspect, accused, but thus also affect the legitimate interests of others who do not have procedural status in criminal proceedings. It is determined the expediency of granting the right to appeal the said court decision to the victim and other persons whose interests it concerns; c) it is noted that the mechanism of prolongation of the term of the IFPA is not regulated in the domestic criminal procedural law, however judges continue it in the absence of a legislative basis. Therefore, it is expressed the scientific position on the rationality of appealing not only the decision of the investigating judge, but also the court’s decision to extend the term for sending a person to a medical institution for assessment. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nguyen Van Quan ◽  
Nguyen Bich Thao

Currently, civil procedure legal science in the world begins to study the application of fair procedural rights. Meanwhile, Vietnamese civil procedure legal science seems to pay attention to the proceedings instead of the procedural rights. In this context, the paper examines the application of rights of due process around the world and in Vietnam. From there, the author suggests a number of appropriate orientations in this area that Vietnam should apply in the near future in order to match the trend in the world and the reality of Vietnam. Keywords: Civil procedure, due process, rights of due process, human rights. References: [1] Rhonda Wasserman, Procedural Due Process: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004.[2] E. Thomas Sullivan and Toni M. Massaro, The Arc of Due Process in American Constitutional Law, Oxford University Press, 2013.[3] Khoa Luật Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội, Giáo trình Luật tố tụng dân sự Việt Nam, NXB. Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội.[4] European Court of Human Rights (2013), Guide to Article 6: The Right to a Fair Trial (Civil Limb), http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_ENG.pdf.[5] C.H. Van Rhee & Alan Uzelac (eds.), Truth and Efficiency in Civil Litigation: Fundamental Aspects of Fact-Finding and Evidence-Taking in a Comparative Context, Intersentia, 2012, pp. 5-6.    


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 115-133

This article examines relevant issues of criminal proceedings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ukraine. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments have focused their efforts on protecting democratic values and ensuring not only the rights and legitimate interests of their people, but also their lives and health. At the same time, the pandemic has affected not only the economies of countries, but also their democratic development and fundamental rights, which have always been a priority of any democratic society. Courts and law enforcement authorities have faced challenges that have been and still are adequately addressed in order to ensure that the rights and legitimate interests of those seeking judicial protection are respected. Each state independently assessed the degree of risks and the extent of permissible restrictions on the rights and freedoms of persons involved in the proceedings, so the present study analyses the different approaches that have been applied. At the same time, documents of the Council of Europe for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) have gained high importance, because they, among others, have developed tools for Council of Europe member states to address the problems of ensuring access to justice in the pandemic. The generalization and widespread discussion of such experiences is important, because it will be useful for states to further improve existing legislation, taking into account best practices. Based on a study of changes introduced in the Ukrainian legislation to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease, conclusions are proposed about the nature and extent of the restrictions, as well as the principles on which they should be based and the guarantees to be provided. Recommendations that will contribute to improving the regulation of access to justice in criminal matters in a pandemic are also proposed. Key words: justice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; access to justice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; judicial control over the protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of persons in criminal proceedings; the investigating judge; reasonable terms of criminal proceedings; publicity and openness of court proceedings; trial by videoconference.


This chapter presents the conclusions to the book. It discusses ideas for the future of the off-campus student-speech jurisprudence. This discussion includes guidance for school officials and students on how to navigate the jurisprudence. The discussion urges school officials to exercise censorship restraint when confronted with off-campus student speech unless the speech constitutes a true threat. It also implores school officials and lower courts to treat students as citizens entitled to the right to free speech under the United States Constitution. Consonantly, the chapter recommends that school officials leave censorship of off-campus speech to law enforcement as well as the civil and criminal judicial processes as obtains for the citizenry at large. The goal of the chapter is to recommend ideas that students, school officials and lower courts can consider in order to minimize the abridgement of students' right to speech in off-campus settings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1122
Author(s):  
Tetiana M. BREZINA ◽  
Nadiia P. BORTNYK ◽  
Iryna Yu. KHOMYSHYN

The paper examines the right of access to justice through the lens of domestic and European experience. The purpose of the study is to improve the theoretical and legal provisions of the content of the right of access to justice based on European experience, the formation of its modern concept, including the construction of proposals for defining this concept in the domestic doctrine of the judiciary. The methodological basis of the study comprises a set of methods that have been comprehensively used to achieve the purposes of this paper: the study of the legal nature of the right of access to justice, the establishment of its structural elements, the formulation of conclusions and proposals for the implementation of European Court of Human Rights standards in Ukrainian legislation was carried out with the use of system-structural and Aristotelian methods. It is noted that the access to justice is the availability, legal consolidation, and direct functioning of guarantees stipulated by law, which allow everyone to freely exercise their right to judicial protection and restoration of the violated right. It is concluded that the right to judicial protection cannot be exercised without a mechanism of access to justice and legal regulation. Ukraine, as a full subject of international law, must guarantee, based on universal standards, the personal right of every individual to free access to justice. However, identification of the social nature of the right of access to justice, for any state, including Ukraine, means an assertion of a fairly wide margin of appreciation both upon specifying forms of support for citizens to exercise the right, and upon determining the categories of citizens who need such support. This obliges the legislator to respect the constitutional principles of justice, equality, proportionality, as well as stability and guarantee of human and civil rights in Ukraine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document