9 Criminal Justice

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dickson Brice
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right

This chapter selects five issues within the sphere of criminal justice to exemplify how the Irish Supreme Court has made its mark in the field. It looks first at the Court’s approach to the principle that prosecutions should be ended if they are unfair to the defendant and then moves to related issues surrounding use of the Special Criminal Court. It considers whether the Supreme Court has done enough to police the Special Criminal Court and whether reforms are necessary in that domain. In examining the Supreme Court’s views on the right to bail and on the admissibility of evidence which has been obtained unconstitutionally or otherwise illegally (with particular reference to the Damache and JC cases), comparisons are made with other common law jurisdictions. A final section looks at the Supreme Court’s position regarding the retrospectivity of declarations of incompatibility in criminal cases.

11. Illegality

2020 ◽  
pp. 405-434
Author(s):  
Jack Beatson ◽  
Andrew Burrows ◽  
John Cartwright
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

This chapter considers what counts as illegality and the effect of illegality on a contract (and consequent restitution). The approach of the Courts to illegality has been transformed for the better, and simplified, by the Supreme Court in Patel v Mirza in 2016. Illegal conduct, tainting a contract, can vary widely from serious crimes (eg murder) to relatively minor crimes (eg breach of licensing requirements) through to civil wrongs and to conduct that does not comprise a wrong but is contrary to public policy. As regards the effect of illegality, where a statute does not deal with this, the common law approach is now to apply a range of factors. A final section of the chapter examines contracts in restraint of trade.

Case Comment: Re D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 595-604
Author(s):  
Alex Ruck Keene ◽  
Xinyu Xu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract How (if at all) can the right to liberty of a child under Article 5 European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) be balanced against the rights of parents, enshrined both at common law and under Article 8 ECHR? Is there a limit to the extent to which parents can themselves, or via others, seek to impose restrictions upon their disabled child’s liberty so as to secure their child’s interests? This case considers the answers to these questions given by and the implications of the decision of the Supreme Court in September 2019 in Re D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42.

scholarly journals A Triumph of Liberalism: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Exclusion of Evidence

1969 ◽  
pp. 299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julianne Parfett
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Causal Connection ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Cost

The common law has historically defined self- incrimination narrowly. Using Packer's models of the criminal justice system as a framework, the article examines the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretations of s. 24(2) of the Charter. The Court has expanded the definitions of both self incrimination and remoteness. The author argues that s. 24(2) has ceased to be a remedy requiring the balancing of interests and has become a quasi- automatic rule of exclusion, which promotes individual rights at the cost of victim's rights. Further, in the Court's zeal to protect the integrity of the system, there is no allowance made for the seriousness of the breach, the consequences of the exclusion, or the causal connection between the breach and any evidence obtained. The author argues that this has resulted in a justice system more concerned with police behaviour than with the pursuit of truth. Instead, either the exclusionary rule must be used to foster a balance of individual and communitarian rights, or other more imaginative remedies should be crafted from s. 24(2) to protect the integrity of the legal system.

scholarly journals To the question of the peculiarities of the protection of the rights of spouses in cases of establishing the regime of separate residence of spouses

2021 ◽  
pp. 154-158
Author(s):  
O.А. Oksanyuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Common Life ◽  
Joint Management ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Family ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Right

In the scientific article the author conducted a scientific study of the peculiarities of protection of property and personal non-property rights of spouses in cases of establishing a regime of separate residence. Based on the above research, the author notes that the importance of the legal position in cases of establishing a regime of separate residence of spouses is the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine №11 of December 21, 2007 “On the practice of law enforcement, divorce, annulment and division of joint property of the spouses “, namely paragraph 12 of this resolution. Unfortunately, this document is the only legal position of the Supreme Court on the establishment of the legal regime of separate residence of spouses, so to determine the approaches of courts of general jurisdiction in considering this category of cases, you should refer to the analysis of individual court deci-sions. The analysis of the conducted case law allows to indicate that the main reasons that indicate the impossibility and / or unwillingness of the spouses to live together may indicate: lack of common life goals and family interests, which makes it impossible to live together and marital relations, long separate residence, lack of joint household , the presence of different views on life, lack of mutual understanding in the family, lack of joint management, lack of desire to continue living together, family disputes and conflicts that led to tense relationships, lack of intention to resume cohabitation, alcohol abuse, lack interest in raising one’s own child, quarrels and physical violence against the other spouse. The decision of the High Specialized Court of the Court of Ukraine on Civil and Criminal Cases in Case №6-27361, according to which the existence of property disputes concerning joint joint ownership of spouses does not deprive the right to establish a separate residence regime, also has a certain legal position.

Protecting Quasi-Possession of Electricity Supply with the Mandament van Spolie – Has the Supreme Court of Appeal Switched Off this Possibility? [A Discussion of Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd v Masinda 2019 5 SA 386 (SCA)]

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-233
Author(s):  
EJ Marais
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Electricity Supply ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Single System ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal

In Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd v Masinda 2019 5 SA 386 (SCA) (“Masinda”), the Supreme Court of Appeal had to decide whether the mandament van spolie is available for restoring quasi-possession of electricity supply. The respondent used the mentioned supply, which was sourced in contract, at her home. The court ruled that the spoliation remedy does not protect the quasi-possession of rights sourced in contract. For its quasi-possession to enjoy possessory protection, the right must be in the nature of a servitude, be registered or flow from legislation. This emphasis on the source of the right is problematic for two reasons. First, it contradicts certain common-law authorities which reveal that the quasi-possession of electricity supply sourced in contract does, in fact, enjoy protection under the spoliation remedy. This applies as long as the supply is a gebruiksreg (use right) and the spoliatus performs physical acts associated with the right on immovable property. Secondly, (over)emphasising the source of the right potentially undermines various fundamental rights. When the common law is open to several possible interpretations, as seems to be the case with quasi-possession, the supremacy of the Constitution and the single-system-of-law principle require that courts choose the interpretation that upholds (rather than impairs) constitutional rights. In the Masinda case, the court unfortunately opted for an understanding of quasi-possession which seems to undermine the Constitution. For these reasons, the decision is an unwelcome development.

Has Gault Changed the Juvenile Court Concept?

1970 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred D. Noyes
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Juvenile Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

The 1967 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Gault case, which extended certain constitutional rights to children appear ing in juvenile courts for alleged delinquency, has influenced some courts to adopt criminal court procedures, with prosecutors appearing in behalf of the state. The Supreme Court appears to have rejected the principle that the right of a child is not to liberty but to custody.

scholarly journals Kedudukan Kesaksian Polisi Penangkap Dalam Pemeriksaan Perkara Tindak Pidana Penyalahgunaan Narkoba

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-128
Author(s):  
Teuku Hendra Gunawan ◽  
Dahlan Ali ◽  
M. Nur Rasyid
Keyword(s):  
Drug Abuse ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Police Presence ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

Putusan No. 1531 K/Pid.Sus/2010 Mahkamah Agung memutus bebas terdakwa tindak pidana narkotikabernama Ket San.Salah satu pertimbangan utama Mahkamah Agung adalah perihal kedudukan 2 (dua) orang polisi yang menangkap Ket San yang kemudian juga hadir sebagai saksi dipersidangan. Permasalahan yang perlu dikaji yaitu hubungan antara tersangka dengan polisi penangkapdan pembuktian kesaksian polisi penangkap dalam perkara tindak pidana penyalahgunaan narkoba.Tujuan penulisan untuk mengetahui hubungan antara tersangka dengan polisi penangkap dan bagaimana kekuatan pembuktian saksipolisi penangkap dalam perkara penyalahgunaan narkoba.Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis empiris. Hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa selama proses pemeriksaan berlangsung, seseorang yang disangka atau didakwa melakukan sesuatu tindak pidana dilindungi oleh hukum sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 50 sampai Pasal 68 KUHAP. Polisi Penangkap boleh bersaksi sepanjang memenuhi kualifikasi saksi sebagaimana diatur Pasal 1 angka 26 dan 27 KUHAP dan tidak dapat dipertimbangkan apabila keterangan saksi tersebut bertentangan dengan Pasal 185 ayat (6) KUHAP, secara formal kehadiran polisi penangkap di persidangan pada saat memberi keterangan yang sifatnya verbalisan. Disarankan bagi instansi penegak hukum untuk profesionalisme, wajib menghormati hak orang yang melakukan tindak pidana dalam memperoleh hak-haknya danketerangan saksi yang berasal dari Polisi Penangkap saja dalam satu perkara pidana sebaiknya dihindari kecuali Penuntut Umum memiliki alat bukti lain yang untuk mendukung pembuktian di persidangan.Ruling No. 1531 K/Pid. Sus/2010 Supreme Court break free of narcotics crime defendants named Ket San. One of the main considerations of the Supreme Court is about the position of two policemen who arrested Ket San which is then also present as witness in the courts. Problems that need to be examined are; the relationship between the suspect with police catcher and  the strength of police testimony in the case Crime Catcher drug abuse. The purpose of writing to find out the relationship between the suspect and catcher with the police how the strength of police testimony in the case Crime Catcher drug abuse. The research method used i.e. empirical juridical. The results of the research it is known that during the review process progresses, a person who is suspected or claimed to do something criminal acts are protected by law as set forth in article 50 to Article 68 Code of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP). Police Capture may testify all meet the qualifications of the witness as provided for article 1 numbers 26 and 27 Code of Criminal Procedure and cannot be taken into consideration when the witnesses are contrary to Article 185 paragraph (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, formally capture police presence is used at the time of giving the information to its verbalisan. Recommended for law enforcement agencies to work are professionalism, respect the right of the person obligated to perform criminal acts in obtaining his rights. And witnesses who came from the police only Catcher in one criminal cases should be avoided unless the Prosecutor has evidence sufficient to support another proof in court.

scholarly journals Crookes v. Newton: The Supreme Court of Canada Brings Libel Law into the Internet Age

2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 205
Author(s):  
Iris Fischer ◽  
Adam Lazier
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Internet Age ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Defamation Law

After paying little attention to defamation law for decades, in the last few years the Supreme Court of Canada has begun to reshape the field. In what has been described as the “constitutionalization” of defamation law, the Court has recently recognized that the common law was out of step with the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This process began in 2008 with the Court’s decision in WIC Radio v. Simpson, which clarified and expanded the scope of the fair comment defence. The Court went further the following year with Grant v. Torstar Corp, which recognized an entirely new defence of responsible communication on matters of public interest.

scholarly journals Coercion or Extortion? (On the Problems of Delimiting Articles 179 and 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 32-38
Author(s):  
Viktor I. Gladkikh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article discusses the issues of distinguishing two types of crimes: extortion (Article 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and coercion to complete a transaction or to refuse to complete it (Article 179 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the objective parties of which have a certain similarity, which gives rise to problems of qualification to take possession of the right to someone else’s property or commit other property actions. The practice of applying the norms in question is analyzed, the author points out the qualification errors in this kind of criminal cases, both at the stage of preliminary investigation and judicial examination. It is proposed to give an appropriate explanation of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document