scholarly journals ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES IN INDONESIA AND THE ISSUE OF PROPORTIONALITY IN FINE IMPLEMENTATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-40
Author(s):  
Nathalina Naibaho ◽  
Anindita Yulidaningrum Purba
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Sentencing Guideline ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mitigating Factors ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Desk Research ◽  
Environmental Crimes

This article discusses the imposition of fines for environmental crimes cases in Indonesia. Due to the absence of law, there are explanations gaps concerning indicators that can be considered when imposing fines on environmental crimes. This study discusses three research questions using the desk research: First, how has Indonesia regulated the application of fines for environmental crimes in Indonesia; Second, what are the indicators to be considered to determine proportional fines as sentencing for environmental crimes in Indonesia; and Third, how has Indonesia applied fines as sentencing for environmental crimes within Indonesian courts. In answering these questions, the study conducts a comparative analysis between the practices of the UK and Singapore regarding environmental crimes. The results of this study indicate that sentencing was ultimately imposed by fulfilling the elements required in the article, added with aggravating and mitigating factors associated with the facts in the trial. In addition, the judgment did not provide further explanation as to how the fine was determined. Therefore, this creates urgency for the Supreme Court to formulate a particular sentencing guideline for handling environmental crimes. The guideline must include provisions on what indicators and stages need to be considered by judges while imposing fine in factual cases. Abstrak:  Artikel ini membahas tentang penjatuhan pidana denda dalam kasus tindak pidana lingkungan hidup di Indonesia, mengingat undang-undang tidak memberikan penjelasan lebih lanjut mengenai indikator yang dapat dipertimbangkan oleh hakim manakala menjatuhkan pidana denda dalam tindak pidana lingkungan hidup. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian normatif, penelitian ini membahas permasalahan yang dituangkan dalama tiga pertanyaan penelitian: Pertama, bagaimana pengaturan mengenai sanksi pidana denda dalam tindak pidana lingkungan hidup di Indonesia; Kedua, apa saja indikator yang dapat dipertimbangkan untuk menentukan penjatuhan pidana denda yang proporsional dalam pemidanaan atas tindak pidana lingkungan hidup di Indonesia; dan Ketiga, bagaimana penerapan penjatuhan sanksi pidana denda tindak pidana lingkungan hidup dalam praktik peradilan di Indonesia. Penelitian ini turut membandingkan ketentuan, pedoman pemidanaan, dan penerapannya di Inggris dan Singapura terkait tindak pidana lingkungan hidup. Temuan penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pemidanaan dalam kasus pada akhirnya dijatuhkan dengan pemenuhan unsur-unsur pasal semata, ditambah dengan faktor memberatkan dan meringankan yang dikaitkan dengan fakta dalam persidangan. Putusan Hakim juga tidak mencantumkan penjelasan lebih lanjut tentang bagaimana besaran pidana denda itu ditentukan. Karenanya, terdapat suatu urgensi bagi Mahkamah Agung untuk menyusun suatu pedoman pemidanaan khusus untuk penanganan tindak pidana lingkungan hidup. Pedoman pemidanaan ini mencakup ketentuan tentang indikator apa saja yang perlu dipertimbangkan oleh hakim dalam menjatuhkan pidana beserta tahapan yang perlu dilalui dalam hal pemidanaan. Kata Kunci: pemidanaan, tindak pidana lingkungan hidup, pidana denda, proporsionalitas

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.

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.

scholarly journals Judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court

Legal Studies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Hunter ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Community Leadership ◽  
The Other ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Substantial Degree

AbstractThis paper examines judicial leadership on the UK Supreme Court. It does not confine itself to the formal roles of the President and Deputy President. Rather, building on existing categories of judicial leadership, including administrative, jurisprudential and community leadership, it considers the contributions of all 12 Justices. In so doing, it provides a significant compilation of quantitative data on the activities of the Justices of the Supreme Court both on and off the bench from the the Court's inception in 2009 to the end of the 2014-2015 legal year. From this, we suggest that while a number of the Justices engaged in one or two broad forms of leadership – with Lady Hale in particular demonstrating a substantial degree of leadership across all three dimensions – at the other end of the spectrum, at least on the measures used in this paper, a significant minority did not. In the light of this, and the significant number of recent and forthcoming retirements from the Court, the paper concludes by considering the implications of our findings for the future of the Court. We argue that these retirements will result in gaps in both formal and informal judicial leadership, and it is vital that these gaps are filled by appointees who are capable of, and prepared to step up to, diverse and varied forms of judicial leadership.

scholarly journals Dishonesty

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Alumni Association ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Obiter Dictum

This article provides an exposition and assessment of the UK Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. It identifies the Supreme Court’s reconsideration, obiter dictum, of the test of dishonesty in civil and criminal law. This term is used in particular in offences such as those set out in the Theft Act 1968. Prior to the Supreme Court’s intervention, the leading case was R v Ghosh [1982] EWCA Crim 2. However, the Ghosh test in that case has been the subject of significant criticism in the academy and elsewhere, and some such critiques are discussed in the Supreme Court judgment. This article, which considers these developments, was first delivered as the Bristol Alumni Association Lecture on 23 February 2018.

scholarly journals ABORTION IN NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: REFLECTIONS FROM THE UK SUPREME COURT

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494
Author(s):  
Bríd Ní Ghráinne ◽  
Aisling McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

AbstractOn 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSCt) issued its decision on, inter alia, whether Northern Ireland's near-total abortion ban was compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This article critically assesses the UKSC's treatment of international law in this case. It argues that the UKSCt was justified in finding that Northern Ireland's ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and FFA was a violation of Article 8, but that the majority erred in its assessment of Article 3 ECHR and of the relevance of international law more generally.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC TRIAL (E-LITIGATION) ON THE CIVIL CASES IN INDONESIA COURT AS A LEGAL RENEWAL OF CIVIL PROCEDURAL LAW

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
M. Beni Kurniawan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Negative Impression ◽  
Rule Out

Civil case trial based on HIR/RBg takes months or even more than a year, which sets a bad precedent for judicial institution because it tends to be complicated, and closed. A proverb voiced, “Reporting the loss of goats instead of missing cows,” increasingly the public’s negative impression towards judicial institution. Responding to these conditions, the Supreme Court issued a Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 1 of 2019 concerning Case Administration and Court Trials Electronically. The research questions, how is the implementations of electronic trial (e-litigation) on civil cases in Indonesia judicial institutions? The research method used is literature study, in particular normative legal research, which is descriptive analytical. PERMA No 1 of 2019 has provided benefits for internal judiciary and justice seekers. Where case registration is done electronically without needing go to court. The payment of court fees is simply by transferring to a virtual account and the summons of parties are carried out electronically to an electronic domicile. It is not just limited to that the trial is also carried out electronically, from the first trial until the reading of the judge’s verdict. However, there are challenges for the successful of electronic litigation from the aspect of legal substance, the electronic trial regulated at PERMA rule out HIR/R.Bg whose hierarchy is above of that PERMA. In aspects of legal structure, It is needed the completed infrastructure and human resources. As well as aspects of legal culture, the enthusiasm of justice seekers who use e-court services.

scholarly journals The ‘one man company’ after Patel v Mirza: attribution and illegality in Singularis Holdings v Daiwa Capital Markets

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. OA35-OA48
Author(s):  
James C Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Capital Markets ◽  
High Water ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The One ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

This note discusses the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Singularis Holdings v Daiwa Capital Markets in the context of other recent decisions on corporate attribution and the illegality principle in English law. It particularly considers Daiwa’s implications for the relationship between the illegality doctrine and other legal principles in the wake of Patel v Mirza. The court employed a context-sensitive, teleological approach to attribution, one consequence of which was the conclusive consignment of the House of Lords’ decision in Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore Stephens to irrelevance. It nonetheless privileges orthodox, pre-Patelian authority in the disposal of the case. The court’s approach suggests that Patel is perceived as the high-water mark for expansive, policy-sensitive understanding of the illegality principle, and that its disruptive potential is likely to be carefully constrained in future decisions of the Supreme Court.

Morrisons off the hook as employers welcome clarity on vicarious liability for data breach

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 504-506
Author(s):  
Emma Flett ◽  
Jenny Wilson ◽  
Rebecca Gover
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Causal Chain ◽  
Cautionary Tale ◽  
Vicarious Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Data Controller ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Abstract The UK Supreme Court has granted the appeal of supermarket chain WW Morrison Supermarkets plc (Morrisons), finding that the Court of Appeal had misunderstood a number of the governing principles of vicarious liability. Considering Morrisons’ liability afresh, the Supreme Court clarified that the motive and authorized acts of the wrongdoing employee are highly material to a finding of vicarious liability, whilst a causal chain of events is not. Whilst Morrisons’ victory is a welcome clarification on the law of vicarious liability, data controllers should take note: had Morrisons not been a sophisticated data controller paying particular attention to its obligations under data protection legislation, the outcome would likely have been more of a cautionary tale.

scholarly journals Collective proceedings in the Competition Appeal Tribunal: taking stock and looking ahead

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 104-115
Author(s):  
Ricky Versteeg ◽  
Alexandra Malina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Collective Actions ◽  
Appellate Courts ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Opportune Time ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Court Of Appeal

A new collective actions regime for competition damages claims was introduced in the UK in 2015. Although seven proposed collective proceedings have been brought since that time, none have, as yet, continued beyond the certification stage, and no further cases are likely to proceed to a full certification hearing pending an appeal to the Supreme Court in the Merricks v Mastercard proceedings in 2020. It is, therefore, an opportune time to take stock of the new regime. This article explores the development of the regime to date, considers what lies ahead, and assesses the overall status and progress of the regime. It is suggested that the forthcoming Supreme Court appeal in Merricks provides a welcome opportunity both to build on the significant progress that has already been made on a number of key aspects of the new regimen over the past four years, and to redress some of the legal and policy implications of the recent Court of Appeal judgment in the Merricks proceedings, which risk undermining the important ‘gatekeeping’ function afforded to the Competition Appeal Tribunal under the legislation. The UK collective proceedings regime ought to then be on a strong footing to resume, albeit its development will remain necessarily iterative and cumulative as further important aspects of the new regime are considered by the CAT and appellate courts over the coming years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document