La Cour Suprême et ses fonctions dans le système judiciaire polonaise

2019 ◽  
Vol 81 ◽  
pp. 103-122
Author(s):  
Walerian Sanetra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Functional Approach ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Structural Approach ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
Cultural Developments

The author asserts that the organization of judicial system in each country is a result of a long evolution triggered by political, economic, social and cultural developments. The Polish Supreme Court was created in 1917, but its current shape is an outcome of changes initiated in 1990s, most notably the entrance into force of the new Polish Constitution in 1997. The author analyses the notion of judicial power by juxtaposing a functional approach and a structural approach. Next, he remarks that the most important function of the Polish Supreme Court is to ensure the uniformity of jurisprudence by examining cassation complaints. Among other functions of the Supreme Court, the author enumerated examination of electoral protests, declaring the validity of elections of executive and legislative authorities, stating the validity of national referendums. The author emphasized that some specific duties of the Supreme Court are stipulated not only in the Constitution, but also in other legal acts. By presenting a wide range of attributes bestowed upon the Supreme Court, the author also invoked the duty of examining complaints against the excessive length of the proceedings, complaints for declaring a final judgment contrary to law, the appellate measures in disciplinary cases involving judges, prosecutors and legal advisors as well as appellate measures against the decisions of the National Judiciary Council. In addition to it, the author hinted at the Supreme Court’s obligation to control acts adopted by the authorities of self-governing bodies of attorneys, notaries, legal advisors and bailiffs. The author comes to the conclusion that the Supreme Court in Poland cannot be described as a typical cassation court. Although its principle role is to examine cassation complaints with a view to ensure uniformity of jurisprudence and its conformity with law, it also fulfils many other functions that are of great significance for the legal order in Poland.

scholarly journals Role and Place of Higher Specialized Courts in the Judicial System of Ukraine

2020 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-257
Author(s):  
V. V. Chumak
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Specialized Courts ◽  
Definition Of

The role and place of higher specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine have been studied and determined. The author has studied such main categories as “judicial system of Ukraine”, “judiciary”, “judicial system” and “judicial power”. The judicial system of Ukraine has been established. The normative and legal base of functioning of highest specialized courts of Ukraine has been characterized. The author has provided own definition of the categories “judicial system of Ukraine” and “judicial power of Ukraine”. The author has offered to understand the category of “judicial system of Ukraine” as the totality of all hierarchically structured elements of the system (courts), which are endowed with exclusive competence to administer justice, built on the principles of territoriality and specialization, are defined by law and united by general principles of their organization and activity. In turn, the concept of “judicial power of Ukraine” is defined as the activity of courts (judicial system) to administer justice and to perform their professional duties within the limits and in the manner prescribed by the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in accordance with international and legal documents. It has been determined that highest specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine are the Supreme Court on Intellectual Property Issues and the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court. It has been concluded that highest specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine play an important role in the holistic mechanism of the entire judicial system, since they are endowed with exclusive competence to consider and decide cases on the merits of certain categories, and their activities are determined at the level of a separate regulatory act, which determines their legal status, and hence their place in the judicial system of Ukraine.

scholarly journals Judicial Law-making and Its Regulation in Independent Ukraine: Its History and Development

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 82-100
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
Law Making

The article studies the history of the origin and development of legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine. The analysis of doctrinal ideas about judicial law- making, as well as the peculiarities of its formation in Ukraine, allowed us to emphasise that our scientific research is relevant because of: 1) the duration of the domestic judicial system and judicial reform, which dates back to the proclamation of Ukraine’s independence (1991) and continues to this day; 2) the ambiguity of the legal support for judicial law-making in Ukraine, the high level of its variability, and the uncertainty of the legal status of the subjects of judicial power in the mechanism of domestic law-making; 3) the doctrinal uncertainty of the place of judicial law-making in the domestic legal system, the ambiguity of its scientific perception, and the understanding of its function in the domestic mechanism of legal regulation. This paper analyses the provisions of the legislation of Ukraine in terms of legal support for forms and procedures of judicial law-making, the legal significance of judicial law-making acts, and their impact on administering justice in Ukraine. Particular attention is paid to the activities of the judiciary in the areas of law enforcement and law-making, the relationship and interaction of which requires strengthening in the current context of reforming the judicial system and the judiciary in Ukraine. The stages of development of the legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine are revealed, the peculiarities of the legal support for judicial law-making are determined, and the content of the legal regulation of the mechanism of participation of the subjects of the judicial power of Ukraine in the national law-making is characterised. Analysis of the history of the legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine and the current state of its legal provision allowed us to conclude that despite the scale of legislative changes in the legal support for the judicial system of Ukraine today, neither the Supreme Court, nor the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, nor any other court institution is recognised by the legislation of Ukraine as subjects of law-making. The legislation of Ukraine does not contain a clear definition of their status as the subject of law-making with the right to accept generally obligatory acts of this process. It is noted that such uncertainty significantly weakens both the legal support for the courts and their activities. At the same time, it is noted that as a result of the adoption of legislative acts within the judicial reform during 2014-2017, which are still in force today, the legislator has made a significant step towards recognising and consolidating the official status of judicial law-making, namely: 1) a number of legislative powers of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine were consolidated; 2) the legislative regulation of the stages of the law-making process by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has been strengthened; 3) the legal consolidation of the status of law-making acts of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has been improved.

scholarly journals State Administrative Court as a Means to Realize Justice

2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 03007
Author(s):  
Weda Kupita
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
State Administration ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The existence of 4 (four) kinds of judicial environment in the Judicial Authority in Indonesia, shows a judicial system adopted in Indonesia. the State Administration Judiciary is a apart of judicial power under the Supreme Court that examines cases relating to state administrative decisions. This article discusses the resolution of disputes as a result of the issuance of state administrative decisions in the state administrative court. This problem will be answered by using the legislation approach and case approach, with analysis using qualitative methods. To test a state administrative decision, a tool is needed to validate a state administrative decision. standard for testing the validity of the state administrative decisions in the examination at the state administrative court, are the laws and regulations and the general principles of good governance.

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN BADAN PENGAWAS PEMILU DALAM PENANGANAN PELANGGARAN ADMINISTRASI DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF SISTEM PERADILAN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-85
Author(s):  
Alasman Mpesau
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
General Election ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Courts

In the General Election and Regional Head Election Law, the Election Supervisory Board (Bawaslu) has the authority supervisory to each Election stages, it is the center for law enforcement activities of the Election (Sentra Gakkumdu) to criminal acts and carrying out the judicial functions for investigating, examining, and decided on administrative disputes of General Election and Regional Head Election.  With the Bawaslu’s authority then placed as a super-body institution in the ranks of the Election Management Body, due to its essential role in building a clean and credible electoral system, it also has potential for abuse of power within it. In Law no. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power has defined state institutions that have the authority to administrate judicial functions. These are the Supreme Court and Judicial Bodies that under its lines of general court, Religious Courts, Military Courts, Administrative Court (PTUN) and the Constitutional Court. The research method is normative juridical, that focuses on the analysis of the laws and regulations on General Election, Regional Head Elections and the Law on Judicial Power. The analytical tool is descriptive analysis, by describing the main issues, an analysis is carried out that was supported by case-approach related to the research. The study concludes that Bawaslu in carrying out judicial functions in its position as a semi-judicial institution has not a hierarchical relationship to the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court (MK); however, what does exist is functional relationship.

scholarly journals SISTEM PERADILAN DI INDONESIA BERDASARKAN UUD NEGARA REPUBLIK INDONESIA TAHUN 1945

Yustitia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-62
Author(s):  
Ihat Subihat
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

A country’s judicial system cannot be separated from the legal system in force in the country. In other words, a country’s justice system is a sub-system of the country’s justice system. Because the legal system that applies in Indonesia is a legal system based on the Pancasila and the 1945 constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the judicial system in Indonesia must also be based on Pancasila values and articles in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. This study was conducted by using normative juridical method by reviewing various legal materials; primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. While the data collection method was carried out through library studies. The analysis technique used descriptive method with prescriptive approach. The result of this study showed that the four judicial environments are under the Indonesia Supreme Court; general justice, religious justice, military justice and state administrative courts, as sub-judicial systems in Indonesia, each of which has an institutional, authority and legal structure separate events that differ from one another according to the specificity and absolute competence of each that cannot be mixed up. In contrast to other judicial environments which have adjusted to the changes in the new judicial power law, the institutional structure and authority of the courts within the military court which is part of the judicial system under the Supreme court of the Republic of Indonesia is still regulated in Law Number 31 of 1997 concerning Military justice and not yet adjusted to Lay Number 14 of 2004 concerning Judicial Power, because the Amendment Draft to the Law on Military Justice which had been discussed since 2005 has not yet been agreed upon by the DPR and the Government. Even when the Lay on Military Justice cannot be adjusted to Law Number 4 of 2004, on October 29, 2009 Law Number 4 of 2004 was revoked and then replaced with Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning the latest Judicial Power.

Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (04) ◽  
pp. 854-884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul A. Sanchez Urribarri
Keyword(s):  
Social Control ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Theoretical Discussion ◽  
Hybrid Regimes ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Comprehensive Intervention ◽  
The Government

This article offers a theoretical discussion about courts in “hybrid regimes” that evolve from formerly democratic countries. The evolution toward authoritarianism typically allows governments more latitude to reduce judicial independence and judicial power. Yet, several reasons, including legitimacy costs, a tradition of using courts for judicial adjudication and social control, and even the use of courts for quenching dissent may discourage rulers from shutting down the judicial contestation arena and encourage them instead to appeal to less overbearing measures. This usually leads to a decline of the judiciary's proclivity to challenge the government, especially in salient cases. To illustrate these dynamics, I discuss the rise and fall of judicial power in Venezuela under Chávez's rule, focusing on the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court. Formerly the most powerful institution in the country's history, the Chamber briefly emerged as an influential actor at the beginning of the regime, but a comprehensive intervention of the judiciary in 2004 further politicized the court and effectively reduced its policy-making role.

The oath of a judge – oath of office and judicial symbol

2021 ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
O. Kravchuk ◽  
I. Ostashchuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Symbolic Action ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Conscious Choice ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
The Moment ◽  
First Time

The oath of a judge as an oath of office and as an element of judicial symbolism is considered in the article. The oath of a judge belongs to the categories of oaths of office, taken by an official upon taking office. At the same time, it belongs to the judicial oaths used in the justice process and is an element of judicial symbols. The oath of a judge as an oath of office symbolizes the endowment of a judge as an official by the state (judicial) power, the moment of his acquisition of powers (it is the inauguration ceremony), and the duty of a judge as an official to perform his duties properly. The oath of a judge as a judicial symbol represents a public and solemn obligation of the judge to exercise a fair trial in all its manifestations, including: independence and impartiality of the court, adversarial proceedings, equality of arms, and the rule of law. The judge takes the oath in a solemn atmosphere in the presence of senior officials (in Ukraine – in the presence of the President of Ukraine). It is an important ritual – a symbol of giving a person judicial power. The oath itself is a symbolic action of conscious choice of responsible and impartial observance of the law in the professional functions of realization of the rule of law for the good of all people. The coronavirus pandemic has shown that gathering a large number of people in one room can be problematic, so the oath ceremony was held even outdoors. It is stated that holding a ceremony in one of the judicial bodies, for example, in the premises of the Supreme Court or (subject to quarantine restrictions) in the territory of the Supreme Court may symbolize the independence of the judiciary and each judge from other branches of power. The peculiarity of the oath of a judge in Ukraine is its one-time nature. It should be taken only by a person first appointed to the position of a judge. In case of an appointment or transfer to another court, the judge shall not take the oath again. In this aspect, the oath of a judge is similar to the oath of a civil servant, which is taken only by persons recruited for the first time.

Judicial Power in a Political World

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Crowe
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
Democratic Politics ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Political ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Political Arena ◽  
Federal Judiciary ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Relationship

This concluding chapter synthesizes the book's main findings about the architectonic politics of judicial institution building and contextualizes them within contemporary debates. It also reflects upon the lessons of the more than 200-year historical lineage of the institutional judiciary for our understanding of judicial power in America. More specifically, it considers the place of the federal judiciary in America's past and future in empirical and normative terms, respectively. It argues that both political rhetoric and academic exegesis about the Supreme Court embody a fundamentally incorrect presumption about the judiciary being external to politics, and that such presumption leads to a series of misconceptions about the relationship between judicial power and democratic politics. The chapter offers a conception that not only locates the judicial branch squarely within the political arena but also places substantially greater emphasis on its cooperation rather than conflict with other actors and institutions in that arena.

時尚設計著作權可分離性論戰──以美國Star Athletica案為核心

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (18) ◽  
pp. 215-281
Author(s):  
許炳華 許炳華
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Apparel Industry ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Fashion Industry ◽  
Single Test ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Difficult Area

美國著作權法之概念上分離自1954年起即引發時尚業及司法實務之混亂，在著作權法之範疇，將美感與實用放在一起總是引發違和之感覺，實用性物品之可著作性為今日著作權法最艱難的爭議之一，「可分離性」原則即被用以處理上開疑難，然而該等原則描述容易，適用卻是困難，而多種現存之概念上分離的標準，使得著作權對於實用性物品之保護成為著作權法中最困難之領域，單一之標準容或降低司法實務間之緊張關係，而得以提供穩定之先例及可預測之結果。美國聯邦最高法院在最近之Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.案即被認為有釐清上開難題之機會，Star Athletica案提出可分離性之新途徑，著作權法並未定義可分離性，Star Athletica案可謂司法意欲填補該等模糊空間最新之嘗試，然而仍被批評所提出之標準缺乏明確性及清晰之指引，多數意見僅僅對法條加以釋義，且對於功能性之理論視若無睹。不過，Star Athletica案亦被認為對於時尚及配件產業，可謂恩賜，如果寬鬆地適用Star Athletica案最高法院所提出之新標準，有可能具備藝術特徵之實用性物品獲得著作權保護之機會將大增。 Conceptual separability in U. S. copyright law has been causing confusion in the fashion industry amongst American since 1954. In copyright law, the marriage of beauty and utility often proves fraught. One of the most difficult issues arising under the Copyright Act today is the copyrightability of useful articles. Seperability doctrine is used to deal with the issues. The doctrine has been easy to state but difficult to apply. The numerous existing tests for conceptual separability have made copyright protection of useful articles an exceedingly difficult area of copyright law. A single test for conceptual separability would alleviate conflict and tension with the judicial system, which would provide firm precedent and predictable outcomes. In Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., the U. S. Supreme Court had an opportunity to clarify the issues. In Star Athletica case, the Supreme Court recently unveiled a new approach to separability. The Copyright Act does not define separability, and Star Athletica is the latest judicial effort to try to fill that void. But the reasoning of Star Athletica still lacks clarity. The majority did little more than paraphrase the statue, and downplayed the functionality concern. Even so, Star Athletica decision is predictrd to be a boon to the fashion and apparel industry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document