The Structure of the English Court System Courts of First Instance Courts of first instance are where matters are first heard and where the FACTS of the case are determined‚ for criminal courts‚ these can either be Magistrates courts or Crown courts. All cases (even murder) are first heard in a magistrate’s court‚ and if the cases are too serious then they are transferred up to higher court (Crown Court) this is mostly indictable offenses. Magistrate courts decide whether the defendant is guilty
Premium Appeal Court Crime
systems of many other generally English-speaking countries or Commonwealth countries. Such as England‚ America‚ Australia‚ New Zealand‚ Malaysia‚ Singapore‚ Hong Kong and so on. The Australian political system is based upon elements of the British and American systems. In 1788‚ when Australia was first colonized‚ British applied the English law in Australia. In order to explain this issue‚ it is necessary to define the concept of ‘common law’‚ ‘doctrine’ and ‘precedent’. The term Common law can be defined
Premium
Judicial precedent is based upon the Latin maxim "stare decisis" which loosely translates into "stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle the established". Judicial precedent is the source of law where past decisions of the judges create law for future judges to follow‚ this law can be found in judgement that is binding. Ratio Decidendi is the part of the judgement that is binding. In the English legal system‚ higher courts bind lower courts so lower courts have to follow the past decisions
Premium Stare decisis Common law Ratio decidendi
believed that the relationship between certainty and flexibility in judicial precedent has struck a fine line between being necessary and being precarious. The problem is that these two concepts of judicial precedent are seen as working against each other and not in tandem. There is proof‚ however‚ that as contrasting as they are on the surface they are actually working together to achieve one common goal. Judicial precedent in its broad definition is the process by which judges follow previously decided
Premium Precedent Law Ratio decidendi
Advantages and Disadvantages of the jury system Advantages of the Jury System Long established trial by peers which has public confidence Lord Devlin‚ a famous House of Lords judge‚ has said that trial by jury is the “lamp that shows that freedom lives”‚ arguing that a defendant has the right to be tried by his peers. Supporters of this view maintain that a jury will exercise common sense rather than slavishly follow the law. For example the case of R v Wang W was charged with having an article
Premium Jury
CIVIL COURTS It is important to understand the differences between civil cases and criminal cases. Since civil cases cover a wide range there cannot be a very specific definition which will cover all of them‚ but a basic definition for civil claims is to say that these arise when an individual or a business believes that their rights have been infringed in some way. Some of the main areas of civil law are: * contract law‚ * law of tort‚ * family law‚ * employment law‚ * company
Premium Common law Jury Law
between two parties‚ the court must first establish what happened. The facts are usually determined by the trial judge. Although in some countries jury may be used‚ in Malaysia‚ it was abolished in the 1980s. Once the facts are determined‚ the judge will then make the application of law to the facts to determine which party would succeed. The doctrine of judicial precedent is important because it is the ratio decidendi of a previously decided similar case‚ decided by a higher court to the current facts
Premium Common law
and doctrines have tremendous influence on administration of justice system in the country. Particularly as an offshoot of that influence‚ the common law doctrine of stare decisis‚ translated as judicial precedent or simply as precedent‚1 has come to be regarded as a source of law in the country.2 Simply put‚ stare decisis is a practice in the administration of justice in common law jurisdictions‚3 whereby a court is bound to follow decisions of a higher court in the hierarchy of the court structure
Free Common law Law Sharia
in modern Ireland‚ two sub-categories always spring to mind. Firstly‚ the persuasive sources of law which do not always have to be followed. Contrasting with these are the binding sources of law‚ which are always enforceable. I will focus on and discuss the latter throughout this paper. I will compare and contrast the binding sources of law in the following categories; Common law‚ European law‚ Constitutional law‚ Legislation‚ Jurisprudence‚ Custom. “Sources of law are the legal origins of rules”
Premium Law Republic of Ireland
Business Law “To create a binding agreement the acceptance must occur‚ and that ‘acceptance’ must be final and absolutely unconditional. This is clear under Australian Contract Law.” As a legacy of being a British colony‚ Australian Law has been very much guided by legislation and case law from England for over two centuries. Even though a number of Acts were passed in the British Parliament gradually enabling the Australian States‚ and from 1901 the Commonwealth‚ to enact their own legislation
Premium Contract