scholarly journals Ownership and Control of Natural Resources under the Nigerian Constitution 1999 and Its Implications for Environmental Law and Practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore Okonkwo
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
And Control

The right to ownership and control of natural resources under the Nigerian law is constitutional. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) section 44 (3) and item 39 Schedule II of the Exclusive Legislative List vests the control and management of the natural resources and hydrocarbon operations on the federal government for the common good and benefit of the citizens. This article aims at examining the constitutional provisions and its implications for environmental law and practice. It examines some theories of ownership of mineral resources and analyses the decisions of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on the subject, particularly the case of Attorney-General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & 35 Others (No. 2) (2002) 6 NWLR (Part 764) 542 where the Supreme Court of Nigeria made several judicial pronouncements on the constitutional question of the derivation principle and ownership and control of natural resources in the Nigeria Federation. This article concludes by advocating for reforms and further research on the subject matter. It recommends the adoption of what is obtainable in other jurisdictions like Canada and South Africa.

Three Supreme Court Cases on Compulsory Acquisition of Land in Nigeria

2014 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 266-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oladipo O Sholanke
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Company Limited ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Rivers State

AbstractThe law of compulsory acquisition of land in Nigeria is rooted in the country's constitution. It is enshrined that every Nigerian has the right to own private property and that such property shall not be acquired compulsorily, except in the manner and for the purposes prescribed by a law that requires both the payment of prompt compensation and compliance with the rule of law on access to court. In 2012, the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered three decisions on the compulsory acquisition of land or the revocation of occupancy rights; Alhaji Tsoho Dan Amale v Sokoto Local Government and Others; Goldmark Nigeria Limited and Others v Ibafon Company Limited and Others; and Ohochukwu v Attorney General of Rivers State and Others. These three cases laid down principles on the subject which are worthy of exposition.

scholarly journals RESPONSABILIDADE EM FACE DE PIQUETE NA JURISPRUDÊNCIA NORTE-AMERICANA

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (54) ◽  
pp. 499
Author(s):  
Edilton MEIRELES
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Deductive Method ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right

RESUMONeste trabalho tratamos do direito de manifestação em piquetes e da responsabilidade que possa advir desses atos em face da jurisprudência da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da América. A partir da análise das principais decisões da Suprema Corte se pode concluir que, de modo geral, os participantes do piquete não respondem quando agem de forma não ilegal. Está sedimentado, no entanto, o entendimento de que o organizador do piquete responde pelos atos dos participantes. A pesquisa desenvolvida se justifica enquanto estudo comparativo e diante do pouco debate existente no Brasil a respeito do tema. Na pesquisa foi utilizado o método dedutivo, limitada à ciência dogmática do direito, com estudo de casos apreciados pelo judiciário. PALAVRAS-CHAVES: Responsabilidade; Piquete; Estados Unidos; Suprema Corte; Liberdade De Expressão. ABSTRACTIn this work we deal with the right of demonstration in pickets and the responsibility that may arise from these acts in the face of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. From the analysis of the Supreme Court's main decisions it can be concluded that, in general, the picket participants do not respond when they act in a non-illegal way. It is settled, however, the understanding that the picket organizer responds by the acts of the participants. The research developed is justified as a comparative study and in view of the little debate that exists in Brazil regarding the subject. In the research was used the deductive method, limited to the dogmatic science of law, with study of cases appreciated by the judiciary.KEYWORDS: Responsibility; Picket; United States; Supreme Court; Freedom Of Expression.

scholarly journals Feu la D.C.D. L'arrêt Miller et la peine de mort

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 567-576
Author(s):  
Henri Brun
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time

The Miller case, decided by the Supreme Court of Canada on October 5, 1976, puts the death penalty under the light of the Canadian Bill of Rights which formulates the right to life and the right to protection against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. The following comment on the case relates to the interpretation given specific clauses of the Bill of Rights by the Court on that occasion. But it stresses especially the law that flows from the case about the compelling weight of the Bill of Rights over acts of Parliament enacted after the Bill came into force. In Miller, the Supreme Court expressed itself on the subject for the first time.

Trusts & Equity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Watt
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Conceptual Analysis ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Teaching Writing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Literature And Film

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 includes coverage of significant recent cases, including decisions of the Supreme Court on the nature of a trust in relation to third parties (Akers v. Samba Financial Group [2017]), the right to recover wealth transferred between parties to an illegal scheme (Patel v. Mirza [2016]) and on the distinction between contractual debt and constructive trust (Bailey v. Angove’s PTY Ltd [2016]). Further reading and discussion of anticipated reforms has been updated throughout in light of the latest legal developments.

scholarly journals Features of signs of the crime object provided by article 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-198
Author(s):  
Алена Харламова ◽  
Alena Kharlamova ◽  
Юлия Белик ◽  
Yuliya Belik
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the problematic theoretical and practical issues of the content of the signs of the object of the crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code. The authors determined the main direct object, revealed the essence of the right of ownership, use and disposal. Marked social relations that can act as an optional direct object. Particular attention is paid in the article to the subject of the crime. Attempts have been made to establish criteria that are crucial for the recognition of any vehicle as the subject of theft. The content of the terms “automobile” and “other vehicle” is disclosed. The analysis of the conformity of the literal interpretation of the criminal law to the interpretation of the law enforcer is carried out. It is summarized that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation narrows the meaning of the term “other vehicle”, including in it only vehicles for the management of which, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, is granted a special right. The authors provide a list of such vehicles and formulate a conclusion on the advisability of specifying them as the subject of a crime. The narration of the article is accompanied by examples of decisions of courts of various instances in cases of crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals Un aspect crucial mais délicat des libertés de conscience et de religion des articles 2 et 3 des Chartes canadienne et québécoise: l'objection de conscience

2005 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-205
Author(s):  
Henri Brun
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Freedom Of Conscience ◽  
Current Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right

The Supreme Court of Canada, obiter, in the Big M Drug Mart Case, has spoken of the "Constitutional Exemption". It is the possibility not to be bound to obey the neutral laws that conflict with one's conscience or religion. It is what we call in French l'objection de conscience. The institution exists in Canadian and Québec Law as a part of the right to freedom of conscience or religion expressed in 2a) and 3 of the Canadian and Québec Charters of Rights. And it goes well beyond the right not to fight within the armed forces. The Supreme Court of Canada has actually delivered six judgments touching on the subject in 1985 and 1986. The conditions under which l'objection de conscience come into play are not so well known however. Does it cover matters of worship or only rules of morals ? Secular or only religious principles ? Personal or only group beliefs ? Do the existence of the rule, the sincerity of the objector and the reasonableness of the exemption have to be proved? Above all, what is the difference between a creed and an opinion ? The following article tries to formulate answers to these questions, with the help of current case-law.

scholarly journals L'égalité selon la Cour suprême

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-710
Author(s):  
Denis Bourque
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

Clause 1(b) of the Canadian Bill of Rights specifies that every person has the right to equality before the law. The purpose of this article is to analyse, on the one hand, the meaning that the judges of the Supreme Court have given to this concept of equality before the law and, on the other hand, the way in which they have applied this aforementioned principle of Clause 1(b) of the Canadian Bill of Rights. Four judgements are the subject of Mr. Bourque's study. He concerns himself with the Drybones, Lavell, Burnshine and Canard judgements. In the course of analysing these cases, Mr. Bourque brings out the shilly-shallying of the judges in connection with their concept of equality before the law. In spite of this beating about the bush two concepts emerge at the level of the judges of the Supreme Court, namely an equalitarian concept of equality before the law, and a concept which makes equivalent equality before the law and the rule of law. According to Mr. Bourque, the analysis of these four judgements shows that it is the concept which makes equivalent equality before the law and the rule of law, which represents, the position of the Supreme Court, at the present time.

Joint bankruptcy of spouses: theory and practice issues

2021 ◽  
pp. 271-280
Author(s):  
Irina E. Belova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

We research the issue of the current law enforcement practice of considering cases of joint bankruptcy of spouses in the framework of insolvency procedures of individuals. We emphasize that at the legislative level, joint bankruptcy of spouses and multiple persons on the debtor’s side is not provided for. Initially, this resulted in a lack of courts’ uniform approach, which has become a subject of discussion in the scientific literature. In this context, we pay attention to the importance of adoption by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of position on the combining admissibility of spouses’ banknote cases. In turn, the permissibility of combining cases did not resolve the issue of possibility of accepting a joint bankruptcy application, which again led to discrepancies in judicial practice. Special attention is paid to the admissibility of combining cases, which is the right of the court, and not its duty. We note that the arbitration courts, when solving this issue, study such circumstances as the subject composition of the persons participating in the cases of debtors, the volume and nature of prop-erty that is part of the bankruptcy estate of each debtor’s property, the per-formance of duties of financial manager by the same person. Despite the de-veloping judicial practice of joint bankruptcy of spouses, justified by the ex-planations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, we believe that it expedient and necessary to establish the grounds, procedure and conditions for joint bankruptcy of individuals who are spouses at the legislative level.

Demonstrations and the Law

1984 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kretzmer
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Government Policies ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
The City ◽  
Main Streets

The right of citizens to demonstrate has been in the news of late. Recent events have led many citizens in Israel to take to the streets as a means of expressing their opposition to, and in some cases support of, government policies, actions or leaders. Following a pattern which is not unusual in Israel, some aspects of this issue have found their way into the courts and on to the table of the Attorney General. Thus, the refusal of the Jerusalem police to grant a permit for a demonstration through the main streets of the city, exactly one month after the tragic murder of Emil Grunzweig during a Peace Now demonstration, led the disappointed applicants, with the active support of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), to petition the Supreme Court. The Court overruled the police decision and ordered the police to grant the licence. On the 1st April, 1983, following repeated requests by the ACRI, the Attorney General issued directives reaffirming the right of citizens to demonstrate and clarifying the powers of the police to disallow or interfere with demonstrations. That one of the two dailies with the largest circulations in Israel saw fit to publish the full text of these directives in its holiday edition is an indication of the interest which the public has in the issue.

The Right to Housing: Challenges Associated with the ‘Waiting List System’ Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality V Various Occupiers, Eden Park Extension 5 2014 3 SA 23 (SCA)

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-121
Author(s):  
Shamier Ebrahim
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Waiting Lists ◽  
The State ◽  
Waiting List ◽  
Allocation Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Court Of Appeal

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