The Administration and the Judge: Pragmatism in Belgian Case Law (1890–1910)

2021 ◽  
pp. 73-112
Author(s):  
Yseult Marique
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Social Forces ◽  
Local Institutions ◽  
Formal Approach ◽  
Administrative Action ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Technological Context

Analysing the administrative case law of the Belgian Supreme Court between 1890 and 1910, this chapter shows that the Supreme Court applied the main features of a positivist legal thought (based on the assumption of clarity, coherence, and completeness of the formal law) to administrative action and its legality. It equipped the central and local institutions of the State with functioning powers, allowing an operational state to develop despite social unrest. As the social and technological context changed at the end of the nineteenth century, the statute book became more confused, however. This gave the Supreme Court ample room to interpret the law creatively and pragmatically. The ‘administrative miracle’ in Belgium is that the Supreme Court did not shackle social forces and unbridle the administration so much that the very course it wanted to avert actually happened. This may be down to the creative judicial genius that the Belgian judiciary developed a formal approach whilst deciding pragmatically on the substance of cases.

The law and practice of customary arbitration in Nigeria: Agu v. Ikewibe and applicable law issues revisited

1997 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virtus Chitoo Igbokwe
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Divergence Of Opinion ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Open Debate ◽  
The Law ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
The Right

“Reservations about any concept do not automatically discredit it but allow for healthy and open debate to take place… the discussions that can arise from any such criticism, constructive or otherwise, can often lead to a greater awareness of the values of the system and ways in which it can be strengthened and made more effective in the interests of the general public.”This article critically examines the controversies surrounding the law and practice of customary arbitration in Nigeria against the background of the decision of the Nigerian Supreme Court in Agu v. Ikewibe. The case law on customary arbitration is briefly reviewed with a view to demonstrating that prior to the Agu case, there existed a divergence of opinion among judges on some fundamental principles of the law and practice of customary arbitration in Nigeria, particularly with respect to the right of the parties to withdraw at any stage of the arbitration proceedings or even after the award is rendered. The article disagrees with the views of some judges and learned scholars that theres no distinction between customary arbitration and other consensus-oriented dispute resolution methods such as negotiation and conciliation. In disagreeing with these views, it is argued that in distinguishing customary arbitration from negotiation or conciliaion, the nature of the decision-making process should be of paramount consideration. It will further be argued that the binding nature or enforcement of the decisions of a judicial or quasi-judicial body differs from society to society. These enforcement mechanisms should not be divorced from the social relationships existing in a particular society. In conclusion, the article endorces the decision of the Supreme Court in Agu v. Ikewibe as the correct restatement of the law and practice of customary arbitration in Nigeria.

The concept of human dignity in the case-law of the Supreme Court of Canada on Charter Equality Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 118-137
Author(s):  
Tatiana Vasilieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Equality Rights ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Additional Burden ◽  
The Impact

This article explores the evolution of the Supreme Court of Canada’s approach to the application of the concept of human dignity in constitutional equality cases. Traditionally, in human rights cases, this concept serves only to strengthen the argument, to show that the violation affects the person’s intrinsic worth. It is only in Canada and in South Africa that there is experience in applying the concept as a criterion for identifying discrimination. In 1999, in Law v. Canada, the Supreme Court recognized the purpose of Article 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982 to be the protection of human dignity and stated that discrimination must be established based on assessment of the impact of a program or law on human dignity. However, in 2008, in R. v. Kapp, the Court noted that the application of the concept of human dignity creates difficulties and places an additional burden of prove on the plaintiff. It is no coincidence that victims of discrimination have preferred to seek protection before human rights tribunals and commissions, where the dignity-based test is not used. Subsequently, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected the use of the concept of human dignity as a criterion for identifying discrimination. The unsuccessful experience of applying the concept of human dignity as legal test has demonstrated that not every theoretically correct legal construction is effective in adjudication.

The UK courts and EU law post-Brexit

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. Christopher-Vajda
Author(s):  
Christopher Vajda
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.

scholarly journals Life After Bilski

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Real World ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
District Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Circuit ◽  
Abstract Ideas ◽  
New Applications

In Bilski v. Kappos, the Supreme Court declined calls to categoricallyexclude business methods - or any technology - from the patent law. It alsorejected as the sole test of subject matter eligibility the FederalCircuit’s deeply-flawed "machine or transformation" test, under which noprocess is patentable unless it is tied to a particular machine ortransforms an article to another state or thing. Subsequent developmentsthreaten to undo that holding, however. Relying on the Court’s descriptionof the Federal Circuit test as a "useful and important clue', the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office, patent litigants, and district courts have allcontinued to rely on the machine-or-transformation test in the wake ofBilski: no longer as the sole rule, but as a presumptive starting pointthat threatens to effectively become mandatory. In this Article, we suggesta new way to understand the exclusion of abstract ideas from patentablesubject matter. No class of invention is inherently too abstract forpatenting. Rather, the rule against patenting abstract ideas is an effortto prevent inventors from claiming their ideas too broadly. By requiringthat patent claims be limited to a specific set of practical applicationsof an idea, the abstract ideas doctrine both makes the scope of theresulting patent clearer and leaves room for subsequent inventors toimprove upon - and patent new applications of - the same basic principle.Recasting the abstract ideas doctrine as an overclaiming test eliminatesthe constraints of the artificial machine-or-transformation test, as wellas the pointless effort to fit inventions into permissible or impermissiblecategories. It also helps understand some otherwise-inexplicabledistinctions in the case law. Testing for overclaiming allows courts tofocus on what really matters: whether the scope of the patentee's claimsare commensurate with the invention’s practical, real-world contribution.This inquiry, we suggest, is the touchstone of the abstract ideas analysis,and the way out of the post-Bilski confusion.

scholarly journals Pravni položaj poštenog i nepoštenog posjednika u odnosu na vlasnika stvari

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 527-543
Author(s):  
Jadranko Jug
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Basic Method ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
The Right

This paper deals with the problems related to the legal position of honest and dishonest possessors in relation to the owner of things, that is, it analyses the rights belonging to the possessors of things and the demands that possessors may require from the owners of things to whom the possessors must submit those things. Also, in contrast, the rights and requirements are analysed of the owners of things in relation to honest and dishonest possessors. In practice, a dilemma arises in defi ning the essential and benefi cial expenditure incurred by honest possessors, what the presumptions are for and until when the right of retention may be exercised for the sake of remuneration of that expenditure, when the statute of limitations expires on that claim, and the signifi cance of the provisions of the Civil Obligations Act in relation to unjust enrichment, management without mandate and the right of retention, and which provisions regulate these or similar issues. The answers to some of these dilemmas have been provided in case law, and therefore the basic method used in the paper was analysis and research of case law, especially decisions by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia. The introduction to the paper provides the basic characteristics of the concept of possession and possession of things, and the type and quality of possession, to provide a basis for the subsequent analysis of the legal position of the possessor of a thing in relation to the owner of that thing.

scholarly journals ON SOME HYPOTHESES OF FILLING A CLAIM AGAINST A DECEASED DEFENDANT

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Svetoslav Pandilov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Supreme Court

Considering the substantive and procedural consequences related to the filing of a claim, its admissibility is of significant importance to the defense of the claimant's interests. Case law of the last few years raised the question of what are the consequences for the claim procedure when the defendant has died by the date of filing of the claim - irregularity of the claim motion filed or inadmissibility of the claim on the grounds of lack of procedural prerequisite. The exist-ence of controversial case law has been overcome by Interpretative Decision №1/2017 from 09.07.2019 on Interpretative Case № 1/2017 of the General Assembly of the Civil and Com-mercial Divisions of the Supreme Court of Cassation, which states that when the defendant who is indicated in the claim motion has died before the filing of the claim motion the claim proce-dure is inadmissible and should be terminated. The above mentioned interpretative decision is analyzed in this report, as well as some hypotheses when the solution provided by the interpreta-tive decision could cause significant issues to the claimant. The report also aims to provide a solution to these practical issues.

scholarly journals Fascism-lite in America (or The Social Ideal of Donald Trump)

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewan McGaughey
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
State Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Campaigns ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Citizens United ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Supreme Court

Abstract What explains the election of the 45th President of the United States? Many commentators have said that Trump is a fascist. This builds on grave concerns, since Citizens United, that democracy is being corrupted. This article suggests the long term cause, and the shape of ideology is more complex. In 1971, an extraordinary memorandum of Lewis Powell for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged that ‘[b]usiness interests’ should ‘press vigorously in all political arenas for support’. Richard Nixon appointed Powell to the Supreme Court, and a few years later, despite powerful dissent, a majority in Buckley v. Valeo held that candidates may spend unlimited funds on their own political campaigns, a decision of which Donald Trump, and others, have taken full advantage. Citizens United compounded the problems, but Buckley v. Valeo was the ‘Trump for President’ case. This provided a platform from which Trump could propel himself into extensive media coverage. The 2016 election was inseparable from the social ideal pursued by a majority of the Supreme Court since 1976. No modern judiciary had engaged in a more sustained assault on democracy and human rights. Properly understood, ‘fascism’ is a contrasting, hybrid political ideology. It mixes liberalism’s dislike of state intervention, social conservatism’s embrace of welfare provision for insiders (not ‘outsiders’), and collectivism’s view that associations are key actors in a class conflict. Although out of control, Trump is closely linked to neo-conservative politics. It is too hostile to insider welfare to be called ‘fascist’. Its political ideology is weaker. If we had to give it a name, the social ideal of Donald Trump is ‘fascism-lite’.

Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
National School ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Impact

The special edition of the national professional scientific and practical legal magazine “The Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine” was published, which contains reports delivered at the online conference "Ensuring the unity of judicial practise: the legal positions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court and standards of the Council of Europe", held on the occasion of the third anniversary of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. time of thematic sessions and webinars for judges of each of the courts of cassation in the Supreme Court, as well as joint sessions for judges of different jurisdictions at the end of 2020. The National School of Judges of Ukraine held these events together with the Supreme Court and in synergy with the Council of Europe projects "Support to Judicial Reform in Ukraine", "Further Support for Ukraine's Implementation in the Context of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights", USAID New Justice Program, OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine. These are projects that support various aspects of judicial reform in Ukraine, compliance with Council of Europe standards and recommendations, offering best practices from member states to help make priorities in the national reform process. The conference and training events were attended by more than 550 participants - judges of the Supreme Court, other courts, leading Ukrainian and foreign experts, representatives of the legal community. Trainers and all structural subdivisions of the National School of Judges of Ukraine were involved, the training activities of which were identified by the CCEJ in one of its conclusions as one of the important tools to ensure the unity of judicial practice. Programs of activities included reports on the role of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in ensuring the unity of judicial practice and the impact on the legal system; unity of judicial practice in the context of standards - improving access to justice in Ukraine: removing procedural obstacles and ensuring the right to an impartial court, approaches to identifying cases of minor complexity and cases of significant public interest or exceptional importance for a party in the context of access to court of cassation: practice the supreme courts of the member states of the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights; key positions of the Supreme Court - application of the provisions of the procedural codes on the grounds for transferring the case to the Chamber, the joint chamber or the Supreme Court, the impact of its decisions on legislative activity, ensuring the specialization of courts and judges, the practice of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court on administrative cases, the practice of considering cases of disciplinary liability of judges, conclusions on the rules of criminal law, review of court decisions in criminal proceedings in exceptional circumstances; the impact of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the case law of national courts and the justification of court decisions and the "balance of rights" in civil cases in its practice, the development of the doctrine of human rights protection; ECtHR standards on evidence and the burden of proof, the conclusions of the CCEJ and their reflection in judicial practice; judicial rule-making in the activities of European courts of cassation, etc. The issues raised are analyzed in the Ukrainian and international contexts from report to report, which, we hope, will be appreciated by every lawyer - both practitioners and theorists. As well as the fact that the depth of disclosure of each of the topics through the practice of application serves the development of law and contributes to the formation of the unity of judicial practice of the Supreme Court, the creation of case law is a contribution to rulemaking and lawmaking. The conversion of intellectual discourse into the practice of Ukrainian courts is an important step towards strengthening public confidence in the judiciary. And here the unifying force of the Supreme Court can be especially important, as the Chairman of the Supreme Court Valentyna Danishevska rightly remarked, speaking about the expectations of the society.

Glosa aprobująca do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 16 listopada 2017 r., V CSK 81/17

2021 ◽  
pp. 413-424
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Świątczak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Person ◽  
Personal Interest ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Starting A Business

In the judgment of November 16, 2017, Ref. V. CSK 81/17, the Supreme Court ruled that starting a business in the form of running a go-go club in the commune does not violate its good name, even if some activities in its activity are contrary to the law. In addition, there are no grounds to distinguish the personal interest of a legal person in the form of a credible image. The purpose of this opinion is to evaluate the above resolution of the Supreme Court. The author intends to compare the judgment of the Supreme Court with the views of representatives of the doctrine of Polish judicial law and previous case-law.

O caso Enka Insaat v. Insurance Company Chubb e a questão relativa à lei aplicável à cláusula arbitral: entre a lex contractus e a Lei da Sede

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 159-194
Author(s):  
Nadia de Araujo ◽  
Caio Gomes de Freitas
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Insurance Company ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Way

When negotiating a contract, parties usually establish that future and eventual disputes arising out and related to the performance of their obligations shall be resolved by arbitration. Such a choice, a clear expression of the principle of party autonomy, is embedded in a contractual clause, commonly referred to as arbitration agreement. The way by which the agreement is written and, to some extent, how it is construed can, and most commonly will, result in extensive and costly disputes. In the UK, the Supreme Court has recently decided a case related to the construction of an arbitration agreement, specifically to the law applicable to its validity, scope and effectiveness. According to the Court, in the absence of an express choice made by the parties, the system of law chosen to govern the substance of the contract will apply to the validity and scope of the agreement to arbitrate. Where no such choice is expressly or implied made by the parties, it will be the law of the seat of arbitration since it represents the system of law most closely connected to the agreement. This article reviews the case-law and provides some relevant excerpts of the case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document