that there is nothing constant in this world except change. The only difference could be the speed at which the wheels of transformation may spin. The idea of justice and the manner of its implementation are no exception to this universal rule. Judicial reforms should‚ therefore‚ be at the centre stage in the fast transforming world in which we live. It is imperative for enhancing the quality of justice that is at the core of human existence and welfare of any society. It is simply the fundamental
Premium Law Separation of powers Judge
Regional Trial Court and other lower courts Regional Trial Courts (RTC) Highest “trial courts” in the Philippines. It was formerly called as the Court of First instance (CFI) before 1980. It was established in each of the 13 regions in the Philippines. Qualifications: Natural-born citizen at least thirty-five years of age and for at least ten years‚ has been engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice
Premium Civil procedure Complaint Service of process
Judicial review is the process in which the judicial branch of the government‚ the supreme court‚ reviews legislation to determine if it is constitutionally valid. Judicial review is crucial to the proper functioning of the government because it keeps the legislative branch of government in check. It prohibits them from passing pieces of legislature that are unconstitutional; keeping the law of the land fair and up to par with the constitution. Without the presence of judicial review any law passed
Premium Law United States Separation of powers
Precedent transactions analysis just like comparable analysis‚ uses a multiples-based approach to develop an implied valuation range for a given company‚ division‚ business‚ or of collection of assets. The main criteria of performing precedent transactions is the selection of an appropriate universe of comparable acquisition. Once an initial set of comparable acquisitions is selected‚ factors such as market conditions‚ deal dynamics‚ motivations‚ etc. are being examined. 1)Market conditions refer
Premium Economics Stock market Price
what the judges say it is”. (Hughes) Judicial activism and judicial restraint are the philosophy and the reason behind the majority of judicial decisions. Most people are often confused over the true meaning and their proper applications. The theory of judgment that takes into account the spirit of laws and the changing times is referred to as judicial activism‚ and judicial restraint looks at strict interpretation of the law and the importance of legal precedent. To figure out whether a judge or court
Premium Law Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION PART II ON WHAT GROUNDS CAN JUDICIAL REVIEW BE SOUGHT? The grounds for JR can be classified in at least three ways: 1. Two principal classes of action may be pursued under JR: those which allege that there has been a breach of statutory requirements‚ and those alleging that action has been taken in disregard of the rules of ‘natural justice’. 2. In Council for the Civil Service Unions v Minister of State for the
Premium Human rights Law Administrative law
1988 Judicial Crisis In 1988‚on the ground of misconduct‚ Tun Salleh Abas by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad was brought before a tribunal and this tribunal was chaired by Tun Hamid Omar. Due to the constitutionality of the tribunal‚ Tun Salleh Abas filed a suit in the High Court of Kuala Lumpur and while proceeding‚ interim stay against the tribunal was applied by Tun Salleh Abas until July 4‚ 1988 but the request then denied. Later‚however‚ an interlocutory order was granted to Tun
Premium Mahathir bin Mohamad
Should the courts use judicial activism or judicial restraint? This is a major point in every court case‚ mainly supreme court cases‚ of how should the judges determine the outcome. Should the judges go strictly based off what the law states or should they interpret the law according to how they believe will be correct. Some notable supreme court cases being‚ Brown vs Board of Education‚ Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association‚ and Korematsu v. US. Most siding with judicial activism over restraint
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States Constitution
2003 edition. 2. Sathe‚ S.P.‚ Judicial Activism in India: Transgressing Borders and Enforcing Limits‚ Oxford University Press‚ 2005 edition. 3. Bag‚ R.K.‚ “Judicial Activism vis-à-vis Public Administration”‚ Administrator‚ Vol. XLII‚ April-June‚ p.167. 4. Bhattacharjee‚ G.R.‚ “Judicial Activism: Its Message for Administrators”‚ The Administrator; Vol. XLII‚ April-June 1997‚ p.31. 5. Bhattacharyya‚ R.‚ “Judicial Activism: The Motive Force of Public Administration”‚ Administrator‚ Vol. XLII
Premium Separation of powers Management Governance
In the 1825 case of Eakin v. Raub‚ Pennsylvania Justice John Bannister Gibson declared that the judicial branch of the government had no right to influence or control the actions of any other branch of the government. Thus‚ Justice Gibson declared the act of judicial review unconstitutional and in disagreement with the proper role of the judiciary as inherently defined by the constitution. The proper roles and powers of the judiciary branch of the government‚ as conveyed to it by the constitution
Free Law Separation of powers Constitution