scholarly journals Implications of Case Management and Active Adjudication for Judicial Disqualification

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jula Hughes ◽  
Philip Bryden

The judicial role of Canadian judges is changing to allow judges to make trials fairer, more accessible, and more efficient. Along with the changing role of judges has come new tools, including pretrial settlement and case management conferences, and even active adjudication during the course of the trial. However, this new role and the use of its associated tools have the potential to raise an apprehension of bias. This article focuses on recent case law and commentary addressing case management and active adjudication by judges, with the aim of clarifying the boundary between permissible judicial intervention that fosters fairness and efficiency, and impermissible interventions that raise an apprehension of bias. Additionally, we discuss the role counsel can play in helping to avoid concerns of bias from arising.

2021 ◽  
pp. 167-183
Author(s):  
Martin Sunnqvist

AbstractThe Supreme Courts in all the Nordic countries reserve, and exercise, the power to set aside unconstitutional laws. In this way, they protect the rule of law and the human rights that are enshrined in their national constitutions. However, they go about this in different ways and treat different constitutional rights in ways distinct from one another. In this chapter, I discuss the development of the diversified judicial review of legislation in the Nordic countries. I also discuss the independence of their judiciaries in the light of the latest developments in Europe. Finally, I discuss the importance of developing standards for the interpretation of case law on these constitutional issues. Recent development brings with it two consequences for Nordic courts: the task of assessing the independence of judiciaries in other EU states, and questions about how the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary can be strengthened at home.


2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 1103-1119 ◽  
Author(s):  
HUGH THIRLWAY

AbstractThe International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) continues to hear and determine the contentious cases submitted to it, keeping up what has been referred to as an acceptable ‘cruising pace’. After recalling the extent to which the demands on the Court have increased, and the practical means available to it have been greatly extended, the author (following up an earlier article on the subject in the Netherlands International Law Review) examines the Court's recent case-law (decisions given since 2010) to show how each decision, besides furthering settlement of the specific dispute, has contributed to the enlargement or development of international law. Attention is concentrated, however, on particular questions: the role of peremptory norms (jus cogens); interpretation of treaties; questions of jurisdiction (including the problem of the existence of a justiciable dispute in each case); and certain incidental proceedings contemplated by the Court's Statute and Rules, namely provisional measures and intervention under Articles 62 and 63 of the Statute.


Author(s):  
Peter Goodrich

Contemporary expansion of the use of images, photographs, film, animation and other visual media in legal argument has given rise to a practice and subdiscipline of visual advocacy. Less studied and commented on, this scopic dimension to legal practice has also resulted in an increasing use of images in judicial decisions. Recent case law provides examples of an image of an ostrich with its head buried purportedly remonstrating against failure to cite binding precedent, a smiling emoji in a decision relating to child custody, numerous splash pages and online order icons in cases relating to consumer purchases over the net, and many further instances of pictures coming to play the law. This chapter directly addresses the role of the eye and the impact of the visual upon the reasoning of judgments, as also on the status and import of precedents that include pictures.


2009 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Catanzariti ◽  
Simon Brown

On 28 March 2008 a historic process of award modernization, by which Australia's award system will be fundamentally changed, began. Over 4000 existing federal awards and NAPSAs will be replaced by modern awards created primarily along industry lines, and occasionally along occupational lines. Modern awards will operate from January 2010 and, together with the National Employment Standards, will constitute the safety net under Labor's industrial relations system. This article considers some aspects of the award modernization process and the pivotal role of the AIRC in creating modern awards. This article also considers recent case law dealing with the implied duties to act in good faith and of mutual trust and confidence.


2016 ◽  
Vol 80 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ed Johnston

This paper will examine the changing role played by the judiciary in criminal trials. The paper examines the genesis of the adversarial criminal trial that was born out of lifting the prohibition on defence counsel in trials of treason. The paper will chart the rise of judicial passivity as lawyers dominated trials. Finally, the paper examines the rise of the interventionist judiciary in the wake of the Auld Review that launched an attack on the inefficiencies of the modern trial. To tackle the inefficiencies, the Criminal Procedure Rules allowed the judiciary to reassume a role of active case management. The impact an interventionist judiciary has for adversarial criminal justice is examined. The paper finds that a departure from traditional adversarial has occurred; the criminal justice process has shifted to a new form of process, driven by a managerial agenda.


1969 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-360
Author(s):  
JA DiBiaggio
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 12-19
Author(s):  
Justin D. Beck ◽  
Judge David B. Torrey

Abstract Medical evaluators must understand the context for the impairment assessments they perform. This article exemplifies issues that arise based on the role of impairment ratings and what edition of the AMA Guides to the Impairment of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is used. This discussion also raises interesting legal questions related to retroactivity, applicability of prior precedent, and delegation. On June 20, 2017, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania handed down its decision, Protz v. WCAB (Derry Area Sch. Dist.), which disallows use of the “most recent edition” of the AMA Guides when determining partial disability entitlement under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act. An attempted solution was passed by the Pennsylvania General Assembly and was signed into law Act 111 on October 24, 2018. Although it affirms that the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, must be used for impairment ratings, the law reduces the threshold for total disability benefits from 50% to 35% impairment. This legislative adjustment benefited injured workers but sparked additional litigation about whether, when, and how the adjustment should be applied (excerpts from the laws and decisions discussed by the authors are included at the end of the article). In using impairment as a threshold for permanent disability benefits, evaluators must distinguish between impairment and disability and determine an appropriate threshold; they also must be aware of the compensation and adjudication process and of the jurisdictions in which they practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document