scholarly journals Regional Benches of the Supreme Court of India - The Path Ahead

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-74
Author(s):  
Sankalp Mishra

There is a need for the establishment of regional benches of the Supreme Court. By the analysis of various statistical data, the paper puts forward the urgent need for widening the reach of the Supreme Court and also to rejuvenate and reestablish the tarnishing reputation of the Supreme Court as an ordinary court of appeal. The paper explores the essential reasons for the establishment of benches of Supreme Court that can be broadly divided into three heads namely (i) wide access to justice (ii) Supreme Court reduced to an ordinary court of appeal (iii) litigation as a measure of well-being. The paper also analyses the recommendations laid out in the 95th, 120th, 125th and 229th Law Commission reports and analyses problem in hand, on the basis of analysis and the immediate need for the reform of the judicial system.

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 416-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. R. Aumann

In 1923 the first state judicial council in this country was established in Ohio. The Massachusetts act providing for such a council was introduced earlier and formed the basis for the Ohio law, but it was not adopted until 1924. The judicial council provided for by the Ohio law was composed of the chief justice of the supreme court, two associate justices, the chief justice of the court of appeal, one common pleas judge, one municipal court judge, and three lawyers.The council was charged with the duty of making a continuous study of the organization, rules, methods of procedure, and practice of the judicial system of Ohio, as well as the work accomplished and results produced by that system and its various parts. The results of this continuous study were to be reported biennially to the legislature, with such recommendations for the modification of existing conditions as the council might see fit to make. The council was authorized also to submit suggestions for the consideration of the judges of the several courts with regard to rules, practice, and procedure.To accomplish its purposes, the council was authorized to hold public hearings, administer oaths, and require the attendance of witnesses and the production of books and documents. A witness giving false testimony, or failing to appear when duly summoned, was made subject to the same penalties to which a witness before a court is subject. The clerks of the various courts and other officials are required to submit to the council such reports as the council may prescribe.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Anita Afriana

The fast litigation procedure stipulates under the Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 year of 2015. That mechanism only requires small amount of permitted claim, it is 200 million Rupiah in maximum, it also settles claims in a very fast manner, 25 days in maximum. This fast procedural mechanism allocated to settle private dispute is called as “the small claims court”, in which, it is already implemented either in states with the civil law system or the common law system. The research methodology used in this article is juridical-normative and juridical kualitative analyze, to aim the SCC phisophy in Indonesia and the effectivity in enacting this mechanism of small claims court as one of the states that enact the civil judicial system. The results shows that the SCC  in indonesia is an advancement as a means of access to justice, in short it is a simple and inexpensive procedure.  that the fast litigation procedure stipulates under the Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 year of 2015 is effectively enacted in civil judicial system in Indonesia. With society needs nowadays, the effort to increasing good services towards justice seeker, it’s inclusive because of the different mechanism of general judicial system under  HIR/RBG, it is not just about time but also with a judge investigation, simple evidentiary, and without legal effort


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sital Kalantry

The Supreme Court of India has long been thought of as a court for the common people. This perception is rooted in the Indian constitution, which grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to hear cases alleging violation of fundamental rights. The Court has also embraced this vision of its role, and conceives of itself as an institution of “last resort for the oppressed and bewildered.” In a judgment from 1987, it expressly notes that it gives greater access to certain marginalized groups:this Court has always regarded the poor and the disadvantaged as entitled to preferential consideration than the rich and the affluent, the businessmen and the industrialists. The reason is that the weaker sections of Indian humanity have been deprived of justice for long, long years: they have had no access to justice on account of their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy. . . . The majority of the people of our country are subjected to this denial of access to justice and, overtaken by despair and helplessness, they continue to remain victims of an exploitative society where economic power is concentrated in the hands of a few and it is used for perpetuation of domination over large masses of human beings. This court has always, therefore, regarded it as its duty to come to the rescue of these deprived and vulnerable sections of Indian humanity in order to help them realise their economic and social entitlements and to bring to an end their oppression and exploitation.The Court’s self-conscious pro-poor discursion is most evident in its public interest jurisprudence, through which the Court removed many procedural barriers to accessing the Court; and assumed wide ranging remedial powers to ameliorate a range of socio-economic injustices.


2010 ◽  
pp. 85-89
Author(s):  
Manas Ranjan Samantaray ◽  
Mritunjay Sharma

Public interest litigation (PIL) has a vital role in the civil justice system in that it could achieve those objectives which could hardly be achieved through conventional private litigation.PIL, for instance, offers a ladder to justice to disadvantaged sections of society, provides an avenue to enforce diffused or collective rights, and enables civil society to not only spread awareness about human rights but also allows them to participate in government decision making. PIL could also contribute to good governance by keeping the government accountable. This article will show, with reference to the Indian experience, that PIL could achieve these important objectives. However, the Indian PIL experience also shows us that it is critical to ensure that PIL does not become a facade to fulfil private interests, settle political scores or gain easy publicity. Judiciary in a democracy should also not use PIL as a device to run the country on a day-today basis or enter the legitimate domain of the executive and legislature. The challenge for states, therefore, is to strike a balance in allowing legitimate PIL cases and discouraging frivolous ones. One way to achieve this balance could be to build in economic (dis)incentives in PIL and also confine it primarily to those cases where access to justice is undermined by some kind of disability. Judiciary, being the sentinel of constitutional statutory rights of citizens has a special role to play in the constitutional scheme. It can review legislation and administrative actions or decisions on the anvil of constitutional law. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Court’s directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. Till 1960s and seventies, the concept of litigation in India was still in its rudimentary form and was seen as a private pursuit for the vindication of private vested interests. Litigation in those days consisted mainly of some action initiated and continued by certain individuals, usually, addressing their own grievances/problems. Thus, the initiation and continuance of litigation was the prerogative of the injured person or the aggrieved party. However, these entire scenario changed during Eighties with the Supreme Court of India led the concept of public interest litigation (PIL). The Supreme Court of India gave all individuals in the country and the newly formed consumer groups or social action groups, an easier access to the law and introduced in their work a broad public interest perspective.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Anita Afriana

The fast litigation procedure stipulates under the Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 year of 2015. That mechanism only requires small amount of permitted claim, it is 200 million Rupiah in maximum, it also settles claims in a very fast manner, 25 days in maximum. This fast procedural mechanism allocated to settle private dispute is called as “the small claims court”, in which, it is already implemented either in states with the civil law system or the common law system. The research methodology used in this article is juridical-normative and juridical kualitative analyze, to aim the SCC phisophy in Indonesia and the effectivity in enacting this mechanism of small claims court as one of the states that enact the civil judicial system. The results shows that the SCC  in indonesia is an advancement as a means of access to justice, in short it is a simple and inexpensive procedure.  that the fast litigation procedure stipulates under the Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 year of 2015 is effectively enacted in civil judicial system in Indonesia. With society needs nowadays, the effort to increasing good services towards justice seeker, it’s inclusive because of the different mechanism of general judicial system under  HIR/RBG, it is not just about time but also with a judge investigation, simple evidentiary, and without legal effort


Author(s):  
Gary Watt

This book provides a detailed and conceptual analysis of trusts and equity; concentrating on those areas of the subject that are most relevant in the contemporary arena, such as the commercial context. It utilizes expertise in teaching, writing, and researching to enliven the text with helpful analogies and memorable references to extra-legal sources such as history, literature, and film. In this way, the book also stimulates students to engage critically with concepts. This new edition is not merely updated but fully revised to include a new layout and a number of features designed to make the text even more accessible to student readers, one of which is a new context feature at the start of each chapter. This new revised edition also includes the latest legal developments, including decisions of the Supreme Court on dishonesty in relation to the civil liability of strangers to trusts (Ivey v. Genting Casinos UK Ltd (t/a Crockfords Club (2017)) and on equitable relief against forfeiture (The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v. Vauxhall Motors Ltd (2019)). A great many new cases in the Court of Appeal and the High Court have been added, including twenty or more in 2019 alone. Other recent devlepments including law commission reports and academic commentary are also included. Further reading and discussion of anticipated reforms has been updated throughout in light of the latest legal developments.


Author(s):  
Мишеле Де Мео ◽  
Mishele De Meo

The article contains the outline of the commercial litigation implemented in Italy taking into account the relevant amendments and changes adopted with the aim of rendering a “faster” justice. The author describes the Italian judicial system which involves courts of first instance (Giudice di Pace/Tribunale), the Court of Appeal (Corte d’Appello), and the Supreme Court or the Court of Cassation (Corte di Cassazione), indicating the statutorily prescribed criteria for referring a specific category of cases to the jurisdiction of each of those. The author dwells on the stages of civil proceedings, which include: pre-trial hearings, civil proceedings and judgment, appeal and cassation stages, as well as enforcement of judgments and orders. The special attention is paid for the procedure of the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment and arbitration awards used in Italy. The author notes the tendency for a gradual replacement of the most of the old bilateral treaties in Europe by the European Regulations, at least in civil and commercial matters.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sipho Stephen Nkosi

The note is about the appeal lodged by the late Mrs Winnie Madikizela-Mandela to the SCA against the decision of the Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha, dismissing her application for review in 2014. In that application, she sought to have reviewed the decision of the Minister of Land Affairs, to transfer the now extended and renovated Qunu property to Mr Mandela and to register it in his name. Because her application was out of time, she also applied for condonation of her delay in making the application. The court a quo dismissed both applications with costs, holding that there had been an undue delay on her part. Mrs Mandela then approached the Supreme Court of Appeal, for special leave to appeal the decision of the court a quo. Two questions fell for decision by the SCA: whether there was an unreasonable and undue delay on Mrs Mandela’s part in instituting review proceedings; and whether the order for costs was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The SCA held that there was indeed an unreasonable delay (of seventeen years). Shongwe AP (with Swain, Mathopo JJA, Mokgothloa and Rodgers AJJA concurring) held that the fact that there had been an undue delay does not necessarily mean that an order for costs should, of necessity, particularly where, as in this case, the other litigant is the state. It is the writer’s view that two other ancillary points needed to be raised by counsel and pronounced on by the Court: (a) the lawfulness and regularity of the transfer of the Qunu property to Mr Mandela; and (b) Mrs Mandela’s status as a customary-law widow—in relation to Mr Mandela.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-121
Author(s):  
Shamier Ebrahim

The right to adequate housing is a constitutional imperative which is contained in section 26 of the Constitution. The state is tasked with the progressive realisation of this right. The allocation of housing has been plagued with challenges which impact negatively on the allocation process. This note analyses Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Various Occupiers, Eden Park Extension 51 which dealt with a situation where one of the main reasons provided by the Supreme Court of Appeal for refusing the eviction order was because the appellants subjected the unlawful occupiers to defective waiting lists and failed to engage with the community regarding the compilation of the lists and the criteria used to identify beneficiaries. This case brings to the fore the importance of a coherent (reasonable) waiting list in eviction proceedings. This note further analyses the impact of the waiting list system in eviction proceedings and makes recommendations regarding what would constitute a coherent (reasonable) waiting list for the purpose of section 26(2) of the Constitution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document