Search

The Victorian Court of Appeal was established in 1995. The Full Court of the Supreme Court, which it replaced, had an outstanding reputation as a court of criminal appeal. The first 10 years of the Court of Appeal in its criminal jurisdiction saw its judgments affirmed on 10 occasions and reversed twice by the High Court which disapproved of two authorities. The next 14 years have seen the Court of Appeal's judgments reversed 16 times and affirmed on six occasions with a large number of its decisions criticised, particularly in the area of sentencing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To have an informed discussion about judicial performance and efficiency, we will sometimes want to explore what judges actually do on an everyday level. But in many ways, courts have not always been paragons of transparency. Often the parties are the only people who are aware of what action a court has taken in a case. This paper explores that dynamic, in the context of decisions made by federal trial courts at one particular procedural stage--decisions made on motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim--Rule 12(b)(6) motions. There is growing interest in the work of federal trial courts, and to date, most legal researchers have turned to the same resource: commercially available databases. But they have done so conscious of the risk that many district court decisions will never find their way onto Westlaw or LEXIS. If the universe of opinions available on commercially available services is not representative of the entire universe of district court decisions, it is harder to draw conclusions about the work of federal trial courts and therefore more difficult to draw conclusions about judicial performance. This paper shows that the fear is justifiable: certain kinds of decisions, issued by judges sitting in certain judicial districts hearing particular kinds of cases, are overrepresented in services like Westlaw and LEXIS. This has the potential to affect the kinds of conclusions one might draw' from observations gleaned by reviewing decisions available only on commercial databases. More broadly, it has the potential to affect how lawyers and judges argue and adjudicate cases, and therefore to affect the corpus of law itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the author discusses the decision of the High Court of England regarding the case of Gregson against HAE Trustees Ltd. & Ors. The author examines the nature of the dog-leg claim, the circumstances in which such claim might arise and the impact of the limited judicial decisions in the context. The author also further views on the considerations whether the court's lack of enthusiasm for such a cause of action has secured protection for the directors of corporate trustees.

Almost twenty years ago, the Supreme Court's decision in Tanner v. United States established that under Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) juror intoxication was an "internal" influence to which jurors were incompetent to testify. Since that decision, many states have discarded their diverse approaches regarding the admissibility of juror testimony on juror misconduct in favor of Tanner's external/internal framework. This Note demonstrates why the policy considerations justifying restrictions on juror testimony are not well served by Tanner's external/internal framework. The Note offers states an alternative approach to the issue of juror misconduct which would better protect both jurors and litigants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the accelerated and expedited procedures before the European Council (EC) courts. General features of the court procedures; Analysis of the use of accelerated and expedited procedures by the EC courts in practice; Ways to increase the EC courts' ability to deliver their judgments swiftly on a large scale.

This article presents a new understanding of early judicial involvement in foreign affairs by challenging both the method and the substance of the current debate. Taking signals from the decisions they read, lawyers and scholars alike thus far have looked for cohesion or disjuncture among comments in a limited subset of the most cited cases and primary sources. Such a strategy is analytically dubious and has allowed scholars to address only those materials most congenial to their own positions. In contrast, this article suggests that a wider examination of cases is necessary to move past the present stalemate.

The ambition of this article is to consider two questions: (1) What interests are furthered by permitting an owner to destroy his property? and (2) When should those interests give way to societal concerns about wasted resources and negative externalities? Part I of the Article sets forth the historical treatment of the right to destroy and explores some conceptual difficulties inherent in any discussion of property destruction. Part II examines the major argument courts have put forth to justify limitations on the right to destroy one's own property-the fear that valuable resources will be wasted. Part III explores the intangible benefits associated with property destruction. When rational people destroy valuable property, they often do so because of deeply held expressive interests. History provides many examples in which valuable pieces of property have been destroyed by owners who used destruction to gain attention for a cause or message.

The article offers a critique of the 2002 decision of the Israeli High Court of Justice that the Israeli policy of ‘targeted killings’, being a means of warfare against terrorism, is non‐justiciable. The critique, resting on the domestic, transnational and international ramifications of the decision, proposes that that decision is (i) inconsistent with the jurisprudence and practice of the court; (ii) inappropriate in terms of judicial policy; and (iii) ill‐advised in view of the nascent global (international and universal) criminal legal discourse, which encourages domestic courts to subject alleged crimes to their review. Such review gives domestic courts the opportunity to address both the international and the domestic communities, signalling to the former, that the domestic system participates in the global legal discourse, and to the latter, that normative behaviour may well advance the national interest. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Presents updates on various court cases in the United States compiled for April 1889. Trial of the Bishop of Lincoln in the Archbishop of Canterbury's court; Publication of the collection of "Select Pleas of the Manorial and Other Seignorial Courts,"; Conviction and execution of Bathsheba Spooner for the murder of her husband. .

The article discusses the business of the Supreme court at October term. Events are again demonstrating that in the context of the country's history, the history of the Supreme Court is a rhythm of quiescence and liveliness pulsating with alternating periods of relative placidity and vitality in American politics. Another lesson from the Court's history is the relation of the practical and procedural circumstances which attend adjudication to the effectiveness of the Court as constitutional arbiter.

Judges and District Attorneys who had originally and respectively tried and prosecuted persons later applying to a Board of Pardons for commutation of sentence were asked to give a positive or negative recommendation to the Board for the latter's guidance. We have examined these recommendations made for 368 petitioners who had been convicted of first and second degree murder and who applied for and received some form of executive clemency in Pennsylvania between 1950 and 1957. Statistical analysis using standard tests of significance has revealed significant differences of opinion between Judges and District Attorneys for the total 368 cases. These two groups of evaluators disagreed in two-thirds of the cases; Judges, in a significantly higher proportion than District Attorneys, fail to supply the Board with any statement; even in judging the same petitioners there is a low degree of association between the evaluations of Judges and District Attorneys; and in only seven per cent of the total murder cases can it be said that the Pardon Board grants commutation in direct conflict with the combined negative evaluation of Judge and District Attorney. A Discriminative Index of Support has been established, which considers the combined and variable recommendations which a Pardon Board receives. This Index determines the degree of evaluative support (or lack of support) which a Pardon Board has from Judges and District Attorneys in acting favorably on petitions for commutation or pardon. Although in the cases examined the Pardon Board has the positive support of these evaluators, District Attorneys support the Board's decisions in significantly higher proportions that do Judges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the judicial decision on a case related to accomplice. It discusses the case of Vermont state v. Hudon. The General Laws provides that a person who endeavors to incite, procure or hire another to commit a felony, though a felony is not actually committed, shall be imprisoned, etc. After conviction under this statute for endeavoring to incite one to burn a barn with intent to defraud an insurance company. The defendant contended that the conviction was erroneous because the information did not allege that the barn was burned or that there was an attempt to burn it. The court sharply distinguishes the new offense created by the statute which requires neither the commission of the main crime nor any act toward it necessary to make out an attempt.