scholarly journals L'inconstitutionnalité des pouvoirs du protonotaire spécial

2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 429-454
Author(s):  
Serge Bouchard ◽  
Marie-Michèle Lavigne ◽  
Pascal Renauld
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
District Court ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Administration Of Justice

The office of special prothonotary was created in 1975 by an amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure. The main purpose of the change was to ease the administration of justice before the courts. For this reason, the special prothonotary received many assignments which were reserved until then to a judge sitting in chambers and even to the court itself. Such transfer of duties and powers may conflict with section 96 of the BNA Act, which acts as a bar to prevent the withdrawal of judicial functions from a superior, county or district court. This paper deals with the interferences between various sections of the Code of Civil Procedure and section 96 of the BNA Act. The first part of the paper deals with the approach adopted by the courts. The true test, according to the case-law, is to determine the nature of the function involved. Since only judicial functions are protected by section 96, it is intravires the Legislature of Quebec to confer on a board or tribunal administrative or ministerial powers. If the transfer involves judicial functions, the courts will use the test adopted by the Privy Council in Labour Relations Board of Saskatchewan v. John East Iron Works and by Sir Lyman Duff in In re Adoption Act, and examine whether the transferee is analogous to a superior, district or county court. The courts will also have to apply the « 1867 statute books test » : was the particular function conferred to the prothonotary before 1867 ? If the results of each of the two tests are affirmative, then the function is one protected by section 96 of the BNA Act and its transfer is ultra vires the provincial Legislature. If the results are negative, the courts will examine if the provisions involved have the effect of vesting in the special prothonotary the powers of a superior court judge. If the courts conclude that it is so, then, the assignment is ultra vires the powers of the provincial Legislature. The second part deals with each of the assignments transferred to the special prothonotary. These are threefold in nature: 1. Actions by default to appear or by default to plead under article 195 C.C.P. ; 2. Jurisdiction under article 44.1(1) C.C.P. ; 3. Interlocutory or incidental proceedings, contested or not, but, if so, with the consent of the parties. The paper concludes that most of the provisions dealing with the duties and powers of the special prothonotary are unconstitutional

scholarly journals Ewolucja katalogu czynności z zakresu ochrony prawnej wykonywanych przez referendarzy sądowych – uwagi na tle nowelizacji ustawy – Kodeks postępowania cywilnego oraz ustawy – prawo upadłościowe

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 310-323
Author(s):  
Hubert Zieliński ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
The Future ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal

The article aims to present the latest changes in the Code of Civil Procedure and the Bank-ruptcy Law on the background of historical evolution of judicial clerk profession and Constitutional Tribunal case law. It emphasizes that the part of new regulations, which were meant to reduce the amount of work for the judges, can be incompatible with Constitution. There is a risk that part of these changes can be treated as an administration of justice, which, according to Constitution is reserved to independent judges. In the article it is also mentioned, which other court activities can be done by judicial clerks without the doubts about the constitutional guarantees in the future.

Payton v. Abbott Laboratories: An Analysis of the Massachusetts DES Class Action Suit

1980 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-282
Author(s):  
Susan E. Silbersweig
Keyword(s):  
In Utero ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Class Action ◽  
District Court ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
First Case

Abstract In Payton v. Abbott Laboratories, U.S. District Court Judge Walter J. Skinner recently granted class certification to an action brought by twentyseven Massachusetts women against major manufacturers of DES. This is the first case in which a judge has interpreted the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to allow women exposed in utero to DES to sue as a class to determine liability for their injuries. This Note reviews the Payton certification in light of prior class action decisions involving DES and other types of claims, and of legal commentary on Rule 23. This Note contends that Judge Skinner’s application of the Rule 23 requirements in Payton was procedurally correct, and recommends the class action device as an effective method for litigating such controversies. Finally, this Note analyzes the implications of this landmark ruling for plaintiffs seeking class certification in DES suits and in suits presenting analogous factual situations.

ASAS TERBUKA UNTUK UMUM DAN KEHADIRAN FISIK PARA PIHAK DALAM SIDANG DI PENGADILAN NEGERI PASCA PERATURAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 1 TAHUN 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 237-250
Author(s):  
Bernadette M Waluyo
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Basic Principle ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
District Court ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Court Proceedings

The Indonesian Supreme Court, in response to the information era, modernizes the civil procedural rules at the district court level.  This is done by issuing Supreme Court Regulation no. 1 of 2019 re. Administration of Justice at Civil Law Courts and Electronic-Court Proceedings. Undoubtedly, modernization of existing rules on the administration of justice is much needed.  On the other hand, these changes may violate a number of procedural civil law principles.  The author argues, from a civil procedural law perspective, that the above Supreme Court regulation violates the basic principle of transparency of court proceedings and physical attendance at court proceedings. 

De werkrechtersraad van beroep van Gent

Pro Memorie ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-179
Author(s):  
Jasper Van de Woestijne
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Labour Legislation

Abstract In Belgium, the administration of justice with regard to labour law is in the hands of specialised courts, staffed by a combination of professional and lay judges. This has historical roots. An important step in the evolution of these courts is the establishment of the ‘werkrechtersraden van beroep’ (‘conseils de prud’hommes d’appel’). From their creation in 1913 until their reform in 1967, these councils were the highest authority in Belgium to settle disputes on the work floor and consequently the highest interpreter of labour legislation. The institution constantly balanced on the remarkable interface between law and labour. In this contribution, a fact check is carried out to see how this balance worked in practice. An exceptional episode are the periods in which this system was placed under tension. Therefore, this contribution pays special attention to the case law pronounced by the werkrechtersraad van beroep of Ghent in the crisis-ridden period 1935-1950.

A Practical Approach to Civil Procedure

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Road Traffic ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
Practical Approach ◽  
Small Claim ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Rule Changes ◽  
Summary Judgment ◽  
Civil Courts

A Practical Approach to Civil Procedure guides the reader through the procedural requirements employed in the civil courts. The volume provides an overview of the key statutory provisions, rules, practice directions, and case law which govern the various stages of a civil litigation claim. Providing practical guidance, the text charts the progress of a typical civil litigation claim, from funding litigation, the importance of alternative dispute resolution processes, issuing and serving proceedings, case management, and through to trial, enforcement, and appeal. Relevant sample documentation is featured throughout and introduces the forms and documents which will be encountered in practice, while key points summaries featured at the end of chapters highlight the essential points covered. This edition has been revised to incorporate rule changes up to the Civil Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2021 and the 129th Update. Changes incorporated into the new edition include: Pre-action protocol for small claim road traffic accident cases and the new PD 27B; procedural aspects of the tariff system for whiplash injuries under the Civil Liability Act 2018; recent case law on service of claim forms and particulars of claim; revised rules on costs management; changes to the rules on statements of truth; revisions to the chapter on summary judgment, including the cheque rule and the approach taken in summary judgment applications for discretionary remedies; replacement PD 51U on disclosure of documents in the Business and Property Courts; case law developments on legal professional privilege and without prejudice privilege; developments on search orders, and case law on imaging orders; further guidance on remote hearings; and debt respite procedures.

Proprietary Rights and Insolvency

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Calnan
Keyword(s):  
First Principles ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Reference Source ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Court Of Appeal

This book explains how a creditor of an insolvent debtor can take priority over other creditors by claiming a proprietary interest in assets held by the debtor, and concentrates on the circumstances in which proprietary interests are created by operation of law or are implied from the arrangements between the parties. This is a subject of particular importance and difficulty in common law systems because of the changeable nature of equitable proprietary interests, and this book provides a clear and structured explanation of the current state of the law, with detailed reference to case law from England and Wales as well as Commonwealth jurisprudence, and suggests how it might be clarified and simplified by returning to first principles. The new edition considers a number of important developments which pertain to proprietary rights and insolvency. It evaluates the key decision of the Supreme Court in FHR European Ventures v Cedar Capital Partners. Although this has settled the question of whether constructive trusts extend to bribes, it has raised more general issues regarding the approach of the courts to the imposition of proprietary remedies, which the book explores. It also covers recent Privy Council and Court of Appeal decisions concerning constructive notice (Credit Agricole v Papadimitrou, Central Bank of Ecuador v Conticorp, and SFO v Lexi), as well as interesting issues concerning the new status of intangibles (Armstrong v Winnington) and the status of the anti-deprivation rule (Belmont Park v BNY). Proprietary Rights and Insolvency is a lucid and practical reference source on insolvency and property law.

Limitation Periods

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Parry ◽  
James Ayliffe
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Turn On ◽  
Limitation Periods ◽  
Basic Position

The legislation does not deal expressly with the issue of what limitation periods are applicable to the transaction avoidance provisions. This is an issue which has, however, been addressed in case law. The basic position will be set out in this chapter. In summary, there is no general rule that actions by office holders are not subject to the rules of limitation and the issue of what time limits are applicable would appear to turn on the form of relief that the office holder is seeking. The position will also be affected if the action can be said to be based on the fraud of the defendant. The office holder would be well advised, however, to ensure that, as far as possible, the action is not delayed as this may lead to a striking-out action under the Civil Procedure Rules. Reference should be made to specialist works on limitation periods for further details of this area of law.

Plessy vs. Ferguson

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Whitney Borup
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Legal Decision ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Legal Power ◽  
John Howard

Plessy vs. Ferguson is a legal decision made by the United States Supreme Court upholding the constitutionality of ‘separate but equal’ laws popular in the post-Civil War South. In June 1892 Homer Plessy, a man with one-eighth African blood, was arrested for violating Louisiana’s ‘equal but separate’ clause when he sat in a railway car designated for white passengers. Louisiana district court judge, Justice John Howard Ferguson, upheld the arrest, claiming a state had the legal power to regulate railroads operating within its borders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document