scholarly journals Immigration Bill 2007: Special Advocates and the Right to be Heard

2009 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lani Inverarity

The increasing role of "special advocates" in common law jurisdictions raises fundamental questions about the development of the law in response to new challenges and the extent to which individual rights can be abrogated in the name of national security. Special advocates are employed to examine and challenge classified evidence, withheld from affected persons and their legal advisors, in closed proceedings. They are, notionally, representing the affected person, but face an almost complete restriction on communication once exposed to the classified evidence. This is strikingly at odds with long-established norms of advocacy and a fair hearing, leading the United Kingdom Joint Committee on Human Rights to describe the system as "Kafkaesque".  The special advocate function, widely utilised in the United Kingdom, will be statutorily introduced into New Zealand with the passing of the Immigration Bill 2007, mirroring a similar development in Canada. The Bill extends the use of classified information in immigration decision-making and allows for special advocates to examine and challenge classified evidence in review, appeal or detention proceedings. That Bill is the subject of this article.

Author(s):  
Frank Cranmer

Abstract The United Kingdom is bound by international obligations to uphold ‘the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion’ and domestic legislation reflects those obligations. The courts have held that to be protected, a belief must genuine, must not be a mere opinion, must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness and importance and must be ‘worthy of respect in a democratic society’. How this plays out, however, in areas such as education, children’s rights and employment is highly sensitive to the specific facts of each case – which are often inconsistent, as the article explains. Much of the article examines the decisions of the courts in individual cases. It concludes with a discussion of the possible trajectory of domestic political debate at a time when there have been repeated calls for a ‘British Bill of Rights’ and the Westminster Government is questioning more generally the constitutional role of the judiciary.


Yuridika ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 469
Author(s):  
Akhmad Budi Cahyono

Default is something that often occurs in contractual relationship. It can be not perform its obligations in the contract in all or in a part, performing its obligations but not in accordance with was agreed, performing its obligations but not in time, and performing something that is prohibited in the contract. Due to default, the injured party may claim compensation and / or terminate the contract. The problem is, the Indonesian Civil Code does not specify how a contract can be terminated in case of default. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a comparative study in other countries in terms of how a default can terminate the contract. The British which adopt common law tradition where jurisprudence is the main source of law is the right choice for conducting comparative studies. Countries with common law traditions have detailed legal rules based on jurisprudence. As in Indonesia, according to British contract law, defaults also can terminate the contract. However, unlike in Indonesia, according to British contract law, termination due to a default is only allowed in the event that the default is very serious. The very serious forms of default will be elaborated and become a part of the discussion in this paper.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chanel L Watson ◽  
Tom O’Connor

Background: The role of nurses as patient advocates is one which is well recognised, supported and the subject of a broad body of literature. One of the key impediments to the role of the nurse as patient advocate is the lack of support and legislative frameworks. Within a broad range of activities constituting advocacy, whistleblowing is currently the subject of much discussion in the light of the Mid Staffordshire inquiry in the United Kingdom (UK) and other instances of patient mistreatment. As a result steps to amend existing whistleblowing legislation where it exists or introduce it where it does not are underway. Objective: This paper traces the development of legislation for advocacy. Conclusion: The authors argue that while any legislation supporting advocacy is welcome, legislation on its own will not encourage or enable nurses to whistleblow.


1902 ◽  
Vol 36 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 417-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Nicoll

The liability of the employer to compensate his employees, as well as other persons, for injuries sustained through his fault, may be traced from an early period in the world's history in the Common Law of various countries.For example, by the Jewish Law, said to have been promulgated about the year 1500 B.C., if a master were the means of causing the loss, either intentionally or unintentionally, of the eye or of the tooth of his slave, he was bound to let him go free for his eye or his tooth's sake. Again, according to the same law, if an employer allowed his ox to gore either his servant or a stranger, he was required to pay various compensations to the injured if he survived, or to his relatives in the event of the injury being followed by death.


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 307-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Bryan ◽  
Peter Rowe

With the passing into law of the War Crimes Act of 1991, the United Kingdom joined common law states such as Canada and Australia in conferring upon its domestic courts jurisdiction to try individuals suspected of having committed war crimes in Europe during the Second World War. Under the 1991 Act, proceedings for murder, manslaughter or culpable homicide may be brought, with the consent of the Attorney-General, against any person who, on 8 March 1990 or later, became a British citizen or resident in the United Kingdom, providing that the offence charged is alleged to have been committed between 1 September 1939 and 4 June 1945 in a place which was, at the material time, part of Germany or under German occupation. The Act further provides that the offence charged must have constituted a violation of the laws and customs of war under international law at the time it was committed. In addition, the Act stipulates that the nationality of the alleged offender at the time the alleged offence was committed is immaterial.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 168-177
Author(s):  
Boris Perezhniak ◽  
Dariia Balobanova ◽  
Liliia Timofieieva ◽  
Olena Tavlui ◽  
Yuliia Poliuk

One of the most important places among the universally recognized rights is the right to a fair trial. The essence of this right is that any violated right can be restored through a particular procedure. In the absence of an effective method for the protection of rights and interests, the rights and freedoms recognized and enshrined in law are only declarative provisions. Given the significant role of the right to a fair trial and changes in its provision under quarantine restrictions, it is necessary to analyze the content of this right, highlight principal requirements and problematic aspects of implementation given the current conditions of social relations. The purpose of the work is to analyze the content of the right to a fair trial. The subject of the study is the social relations that arise, change, and terminate during the exercise of the right to a fair trial. The research methodology includes such methods as a statistical-mathematical method, method of social-legal experiment, cybernetic method, comparative-legal method, formal-legal method, logical-legal method, and method of alternatives. The study will analyze the content of the right to a fair trial as international law and national law, its impact and interaction with the national legal system of Ukraine, which includes theoretical, applied, and common law aspects and conceptual rethinking in an era of quarantine restrictions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-395
Author(s):  
Paul F. Scott

AbstractThis article, on the basis of a consideration of the development of the law relating to the use of passports as a tool of national security in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, challenges the common law conception of passports, arguing that passports effectively confer rights and so, consequentially, that the refusal or withdrawal of a passport represents a denial of rights. From this conclusion a number of points flow. Though these consequences are most acute for the United Kingdom and Canada, in which passports remain regulated by, and are issued under, prerogative powers, there are also a number of points of significance for Australia and New Zealand, where passports have a statutory basis.


1979 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-285
Author(s):  
Wilberforce

I was not surprised when, from several alternative subjects, you chose, as the title of my Lecture, the need for a Constitution in Britain. Those of us without a written constitution are indeed, a select club—New Zealand, Israel, the United Kingdom.I will start with a quotation from Lord Salmon. In a recent lecture, he said: In this country [U.K.] we have an unwritten constitution. I have always regarded this as a blessing and never agreed with the theoretical objections to it. It is superbly flexible and above all it has stood the test of time. It works—and works admirably. But I am beginning to wonder whether it might not be wise to evolve, not an elaborate written constitution but perhaps the equivalent of a modern Bill of Rights. A statute which should lay down our basic freedoms, provide for their preservation and enact that it could not be repealed save by, say, a 75% majority of both Houses of Parliament.One can recognize in this passage the views of an eminent common lawyer, believing in the strength and potentialities of the common law as a flexible instrument, in, of course, the right hands: of one who believes deeply in human freedom, and who is concerned about the threat to it: who desires an explicit definition of the basic liberties and who believes that these can be protected by a sufficiently strong, entrenched, legal system. In this he undoubtedly reflects the views of many people, probably of the majority of ordinary men.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-80
Author(s):  
James Goudkamp ◽  
Lorenz König

AbstractThis article addresses the principles of tort law that govern claims in respect of lost illegal earnings. It focuses on common law jurisdictions (and the law in the United Kingdom in particular) where such claims, despite apparently being commonplace, have been largely ignored by academics. It describes the existing law and calls in aid in this regard a four-fold taxonomy of cases. The article then turns attention to how claims in respect of lost illegal earnings ought to be decided. At this juncture, the article looks to ideas emanating from German tort law, which has developed a highly sophisticated jurisprudence on the subject of illegal earnings. The German approach, stated simply, requires tort law to defer to rules in other departments of private law. If, for example, contract law would not protect an interest that a claimant has in a particular transaction by reason of the transaction being tainted with illegality, tort law will not allow a claimant indirectly to obtain the benefits of that transaction via a claim for lost illegal earnings. It is argued that the German solution holds considerable promise and merits consideration as a serious alternative to the significantly more complicated principles that the common law courts have developed, which principles currently lack any thoroughgoing rationalisation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test).  This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document