Interview With the Honorable Lord Tyre CBE, Judge of the Supreme Courts of Scotland, the Judiciary of Scotland

1999 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 204-205

Author(s):

Megan Cleary

Keyword(s):

Sexual Abuse ◽

Child Sexual Abuse ◽

Supreme Court ◽

New Hampshire ◽

Third Parties ◽

State Supreme Courts ◽

Recovered Memories ◽

Supreme Courts ◽

Repressed Memory ◽

University Of Colorado

In recent years, the law in the area of recovered memories in child sexual abuse cases has developed rapidly. See J.K. Murray, “Repression, Memory & Suggestibility: A Call for Limitations on the Admissibility of Repressed Memory Testimony in Abuse Trials,” University of Colorado Law Review, 66 (1995): 477-522, at 479. Three cases have defined the scope of liability to third parties. The cases, decided within six months of each other, all involved lawsuits by third parties against therapists, based on treatment in which the patients recovered memories of sexual abuse. The New Hampshire Supreme Court, in Hungerford v. Jones, 722 A.2d 478 (N.H. 1998), allowed such a claim to survive, while the supreme courts in Iowa, in J.A.H. v. Wadle & Associates, 589 N.W.2d 256 (Iowa 1999), and California, in Eear v. Sills, 82 Cal. Rptr. 281 (1991), rejected lawsuits brought by nonpatients for professional liability.

Download Full-text

Stephen Thomson, The Nobile Officium: The Extraordinary Equitable Jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts of Scotland

Edinburgh Law Review ◽

10.3366/elr.2016.0352 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 245-247

Author(s):

J D Ford

Keyword(s):

Supreme Courts

Download Full-text

ANALISIS YURIDIS NORMATIF PUTUSAN PERKARA MAHKAMAH AGUNG KONSTITUSI RI No. 004/PUU-II/2004

Sosial & Humaniora ◽

10.24123/jsh.v7i1.675 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 7

Author(s):

Doni Budiono

Keyword(s):

The Body ◽

Supreme Courts ◽

Military Justice ◽

State Administration ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Directorate General ◽

The Government ◽

Government Rules ◽

The Right ◽

Tax Court

The authority of justice in Indonesia is executed by the Supreme Courts and the justice boards/body under the Supreme Courts, including the general justice, religious affairs justice, military justice, state administration justice, and the Constitution Court. According to certainty in the Act of Tax Court, Article1, clause (5), tax dispute refers to the legal dispute arising in the taxation affairs between the tax payer or the body responsible for the tax with the government executives ( Directorate General of Tax) as the consequence of the issue of the decree for the appeal to the Tax Court in accordance with the tax Act, including the charge against the execution of collection in accordance with the Act of Tax Collection by force. The formation of Tax Court is designed by the Executives, in this case, the Department of Finance, specifically the Directorate General of Tax which has the right to issue law more technical about tax accord to Article 14, letter A, President Decree no. 44 year 1974, concerning the basic organization of the Department. Based on it, it is clear that in addition to execute the government rules and policy, this body has to execute judicial rules and policy. This is against the principles of Judicative Power/Authority in Indonesia, which clearly states that this body should be under the Supreme Court. Therefore. It is suggested that the Act No UU no.14 Year 2012 concerning Tax Court be revised in accordance with the system of Power Division of Justice as stated in 45 Constitutions.

Download Full-text