Unsustainability of Debt-Based Money

In addition to the problems caused by money being fiat, most modern money is moreover created not by governments but by the privately-owned banking systems as debt to themselves. This is not only grossly contrary to all traditions of natural justice, it is also unconstitutional. This problem has been understood and publicised by many politicians and writers over centuries, but it is still not widely known due to the financial and political power of the perpetrators. Since it is also the main cause of the continuing increase in inequality in all the rich countries, the “great reset” being advocated by those in charge of the present system is clearly not fit to become the new basis of the economic system.

The scope of changes in the criminal law system in India

The criminal justice system is an idea founded on judicial principles and constitutionalism. It includes the interaction of many institutions and remedies. An effective criminal justice system is essential for an orderly society and the protection of human rights. However, quite different from this ideology, Indian criminal justice faces many complications such as soaring crime rates, outdated laws, late proceedings, inefficient law enforcement agencies. to name a few. The criminal justice system urgently needs reform measures, based on natural justice and human rights, to rejuvenate the system. These minimal but essential measures include consistent reform of the criminal law, fostering and building trust in a skeptical justice system, curbing abuses of power by the police system, and obvious measures. of the welfare state and it is the moral duty of every citizen of India to obey and respect criminals. judicial system.

Two Theories of Natural Justice in Plato’s Gorgias

In Plato’s Gorgias 482c4–484c3, Callicles advances a concept of natural justice: the laws of the polis must agree with nature, that is, human nature. Since human nature is characterised by its desire to get a greater share (pleon echein), nature itself makes it legitimate that stronger human beings get a greater share than weaker ones. Socrates objects: Callicles’ theoretical approach to civic life poses a threat to the polis’ community, its citizens, and to the friendship amongst its citizens. However, Socrates accepts Callicles’ premise, that the laws of the polis must agree with nature (again, human nature). Still, he disagrees with Callicles about the nature of human nature and proposes an alternative theory of human nature, eventually leading to his alternative concept of natural justice. The article explains the arguments underpinning these two concepts of natural justice, including the conflicting understandings of human nature.

Review of arbitral awards for breach of natural justice: an internationalist approach

<p>While international commercial arbitration is widely regarded as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism to litigation in national courts, those courts are frequently engaged in the review arbitral awards in the context of annulment as well as recognition and enforcement. A key purpose of this review is to ensure that the arbitral procedure is consistent with the fundamental principles of natural justice. These principles find their origin in the general principles of law common to civilised nations, and their application is mandated by both the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law. This paper argues that the content of these principles should be ‘internationalised’. That is, it is both appropriate and desirable that domestic courts, irrespective of the jurisdiction in which they happen to be sitting, apply the basic rules of natural justice in uniform way. It is submitted that this would not only result in a consistent and therefore reliable recognition and enforcement regime, but would also contribute to the success and increased adoption of international arbitration as a key alternative dispute resolution mechanism.</p>

Review of arbitral awards for breach of natural justice: an internationalist approach

<p>While international commercial arbitration is widely regarded as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism to litigation in national courts, those courts are frequently engaged in the review arbitral awards in the context of annulment as well as recognition and enforcement. A key purpose of this review is to ensure that the arbitral procedure is consistent with the fundamental principles of natural justice. These principles find their origin in the general principles of law common to civilised nations, and their application is mandated by both the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law. This paper argues that the content of these principles should be ‘internationalised’. That is, it is both appropriate and desirable that domestic courts, irrespective of the jurisdiction in which they happen to be sitting, apply the basic rules of natural justice in uniform way. It is submitted that this would not only result in a consistent and therefore reliable recognition and enforcement regime, but would also contribute to the success and increased adoption of international arbitration as a key alternative dispute resolution mechanism.</p>

Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40, House of Lords

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40, House of Lords. This case considered whether the process by which a Chief Constable was sacked amounted to procedural unfairness and breached the rules of natural justice. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

6. General principles of law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights

This chapter discusses the overarching principles of the Union legal order, e.g. subsidiarity, proportionality, sustainability and equality; fundamental human rights in the Union (Court of Justice jurisdiction over Member State acts and rights against Union institutions or agents); and principles of administrative justice and good governance (legal certainty, non-retroactivity and legitimate expectations, rights of process and natural justice, transparency and legal professional privilege).

18. Procedural Impropriety

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. A public authority must have the legal power to act; if that power is conferred by statute, it may also specify the procedure that must be used prior to an action or a decision being taken. This is what is known as a ‘statutory procedure’ because it is specified in a statute. The statute may, for example, require the authority to give notice of its intention to take action in a certain way, to consult interested groups, or to tell individuals that they have the right to appeal from an adverse decision. If the authority does not comply, then this is a breach of the statutory procedure and may be reviewed as a procedural impropriety. This chapter discusses the judicial review of procedural impropriety. It covers the rules of natural justice; the right to be heard; legitimate expectation; the detailed requirements of natural justice; the rule against bias; and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

13. Grounds for judicial reviewProcedural impropriety, natural justice, and legitimate expectation

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the grounds for judicial review. These include procedural impropriety, which means breach of the rules of natural justice, and failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements. This chapter looks at the definitional elements of the rules of natural justice, whether the rules of natural justice apply in principle, the extent to which the rules of natural justice apply, disciplinary hearings, licensing cases, pecuniary and personal bias, whether or not a fair trial has taken place, and the right to be given reasons for a decision. This chapter also considers legitimate expectation as a ground for judicial review.