Supreme confidence

An overview of the decisions taken by the UK Supreme Court in 2012

The Supreme Court���s Understanding of Federalism: Efficiency at the Expense of Diversity

This paper is an examination of the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretation of federalism since constitutional repatriation in 1982. It argues that the lure of centralist efficiency is overpowering a fundamentally important part of our federal order: regionalism. The author contends that changes made by the Court to certain fundamental concepts of Canadian constitutional law now provide Parliament with greater latitude than before in the exercise of its legislative powers. According to the author, these changes are disturbing because they are structured so as to preclude consideration of the legitimate concerns of regional polities. Furthermore, he argues that the Court has reinforced the central government's power to regulate the economy, including intraprovincial matters affecting trade, by resorting to highly functional tests that emphasize economic efficiency over other criteria. This, he claims, makes it more difficult to invoke legitimate regional interests that would lead to duplication, overlapping and even, in the eyes of some, inefficiency. The author the focuses on the Court's treatment of environmental protection in an attempt to show the tension between the Court's desire to use a functional approach and the need to recognize regional interests. Finally, through an examination of recent case law, he attemps to demonstrate that the Court's dominant perspective remains functional despite its endorsement of a more community-oriented undestanding of federalism in Secession Reference. If the Court chooses to proceed in this manner, it will alienate regional polities and may encourage them to choose more radical means of asserting their differences. Further, the author argues that strict adherence to the functional effectiveness approach will undermine the very values that federalism is meant to promote.

Institutional Boundaries and Judicial Review - Some Thoughts on How the Court is Going About Its Business: Desperately Seeking Coherence

Cet article a précédemment été publié par la Supreme Court Law Review (Second Series).

Inherent Powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973

This thesis is shows the result of the research work on the inherent Powers of the High Court in criminal jurisdiction. The criminal justice system in India recognizes inherent powers only of the High Court. The Theory and Philosophy of inherent powers are concerned the Distinction between civil and Criminal laws are of very little consequence. In formulating the research programme the confusion created by the concept of inherent powers and its application by High Court form the central point. How fully the concept is understood, how correctly the power is used, and how far it has enhanced the rationale of the administration of criminal justice, what is its importance and what are the solutions for the inherent power to earn a permanent status in the province of criminal jurisprudence are the themes of this study. The precipitation of new dimensions is the yardstick to acknowledge the inherent powers of the High Court and Supreme Court. It is of instant value in criminal justice system. This study concludes innovativeness provided by the inherent powers has helped the justice administration draw inspiration from the Constitution. A jurisprudence of inherent powers has developed with the weilding of inherent powers of the Supreme Court and the High Court. It is to unravel mystery of jurisprudence caused by the operation of the concept of inherent powers this research work gives emphasis. Its significance is all the more relevant when the power is exercised in the administration of criminal justice. Application or non application of inherent powers in a given case would tell upon the maturity and perfection of the standard of justice

La travesía obsoleta: la indefensión del consumidor

La obsolescencia programada es el deseo de tener algo un poco más nuevo, un poco mejor, un poco más rápido de lo necesario. El texto estudia este fenómeno a la luz del Estatuto del Consumidor – Ley 1480 de 2011 para determinar si el consumidor colombiano está suficientemente protegido con él.

Governor Tom Judge: Early Years - The Path to Becoming Montana's 18th Governor -- Sidney Armstrong, Larry Pettit & Kent Kleinkopf “In the Crucible of Change”

The dramatic period of progressive change in Montana that is documented "In the Crucible of Change" series really exploded with the election of Governors Forrest Anderson and Tom Judge. Anderson's single term saw the dispatching of the sales tax as an issue for a long period, the reorganization of the executive branch of state government and the revision of Montana's Constitution. As a former legislator, county attorney, Supreme Court justice, and Attorney General, Anderson brought unmatched experience to the governorship when elected. Tom Judge, although much younger (elected MT’s youngest governor at age 38 immediately following Anderson), also brought serious experience to the governorship: six years as a MT State Representative, two years as a MT State Senator, four years is Lieutenant Governor and significant business experience. The campaign and election of John F. Kennedy in 1960 spurred other young Americans to service, including Tom Judge. First elected in 1960, he rose rapidly through MT’s political-governmental hierarchy until he took over the governorship in time to implement many of the changes started in Governor Anderson’s term. But as a strong progressive leader in his own right, Governor Judge sponsored and implemented significant advancements of his own for Montana. Those accomplishments, however, are the subject of other films in this series. This film deals with Tom Judge’s early years – his rise to the governorship from when he returned home after college at Notre Dame and newspaper experience in Kentucky to his actual election in November 1972. That story is discussed in this episode by three major players in the effort, all directly involved in Tom Judge’s early years and path to the governorship: Sidney Armstrong, Larry Pettit and Kent Kleinkopf. Their recollections of the early Tom Judge and the period of his advancement to the governorship provide an insider’s perspective of the growth of this significant leader of the important period of progressive change documented “In the Crucible of Change.” Sidney Armstrong, President of Sidney Armstrong Consulting, serves on the board and as the Executive Director of the Greater Montana Foundation. Formerly Executive Director of the Montana Community Foundation (MCF), she has served on national committees and participated in national foundation initiatives. While at MCF, she worked extensively with MT Governors Racicot and Martz on the state charitable endowment tax credit and other endowed philanthropy issues. A member of MT Governor Thomas L. Judge’s staff in the 1970s, she was also part of Governor Brian Schweitzer’s 2004 Transition Team, continuing to serve as a volunteer advisor during his term. In the 1980s, Sidney also worked for the MT State AFL-CIO and the MT Democratic Party as well as working two sessions with the MT Senate as Assistant Secretary of the Senate and aide to the President. A Helena native, and great granddaughter of pioneer Montanans, Sidney has served on numerous nonprofit boards, and is currently a board member for the Montana History Foundation. Recently she served on the board of the Holter Museum of Art and was a Governor’s appointee to the Humanities Montana board. She is a graduate of the International School of Geneva, Switzerland and the University of Montana. Armstrong's Irish maternal immigrant great-grandparents, Thomas and Maria Cahill Cooney, came to Virginia City, MT in a covered wagon in 1865, looking for gold. Eventually, they settled on the banks of the Missouri River outside Helena as ranchers. She also has roots in Butte, MT, where her journalist father's family, both of whom were newspaper people, lived. Her father, Richard K. O’Malley, is also the author of a well-known book about Butte, Mile High, Mile Deep, recently re-published by Russell Chatham. She is the mother of four and the grandmother of eight. Dr. Lawrence K. Pettit (Larry Pettit) (b. 5/2/1937) has had a dual career in politics and higher education. In addition to being Montana’s first Commissioner of Higher Education (the subject of another film in this series); Pettit, of Lewistown, served as legislative assistant to U.S. Senators James E. Murray and Lee Metcalf, campaign manager, head of transition team and assistant to Montana Governor Thomas L. Judge; taught political science at The Pennsylvania State University (main campus), was chair of political science at Montana State University, Deputy Commissioner for Academic Programs at the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Chancellor of the University System of South Texas (since merged with Texas A&M University), President of Southern Illinois University, and President of Indiana University of Pennsylvania from where he retired in 2003. He has served as chair of the Commission on Leadership for the American Council on Education, president of the National Association of (University) System Heads, and on many national and state boards and commissions in higher education. Pettit is author of “If You Live by the Sword: Politics in the Making and Unmaking of a University President.” More about Pettit is found at http://www.lawrencekpettit.com… Kent Kleinkopf of Missoula is co-founder of a firm with a national scope of business that specializes in litigation consultation, expert vocational testimony, and employee assistance programs. His partner (and wife of 45 years) Kathy, is an expert witness in the 27 year old business. Kent received a BA in History/Education from the University of Idaho and an MA in Economics from the University of Utah. The Kleinkopfs moved to Helena, MT in 1971 where he was Assistant to the Commissioner of State Lands (later Governor) Ted Schwinden. In early 1972 Kent volunteered full time in Lt. Governor Tom Judge’s campaign for Governor, driving the Lt. Governor extensively throughout Montana. After Judge was elected governor, Kent briefly joined the staff of Governor Forrest Anderson, then in 1973 transitioned to Judge’s Governor’s Office staff, where he became Montana’s first “Citizens’ Advocate.” In that capacity he fielded requests for assistance from citizens with concerns and information regarding State Agencies. While on the Governor’s staff, Kent continued as a travel aide with the governor both in Montana and nationally. In 1977 Kent was appointed Director of the MT Department of Business Regulation. That role included responsibility as Superintendent of Banking and Chairman of the State Banking Board, where Kent presided over the chartering of many banks, savings and loans, and credit unions. In 1981 the Kleinkopfs moved to Missoula and went into the business they run today. Kent was appointed by Governor Brian Schweitzer to the Board of the Montana Historical Society in 2006, was reappointed and continues to serve. Kathy and Kent have a daughter and son-in-law in Missoula.

Present at the Creation: Montana Higher Education Reforms from 1972 Constitution -- Dr. Lawrence K. Pettit “In the Crucible of Change”

Prior to the passage of the 1972 Constitution, Montana’s higher education system was both controlled and victimized by Montana’s politics. Alternatingly, Governors or the Legislature tried to control and/or impose political ideology upon the management and teaching/content within the University System. Political favoritism and power-broking were the hallmark of the legislative appropriation process. Under the new Constitution, a newly empowered Board of Regents, and a new Commissioner of Higher Education managed the system and controlled the allocation of the legislative appropriations, but not without a major battle before the Montana Supreme Court. Dr. Lawrence K. Pettit (Larry Pettit) (b. 5/2/1937) was present at the creation of this newly structured higher education system as the first Commissioner of Higher Education in Montana after his appointment by the Board of Regents of the University System in 1973. Larry Pettit has had a dual career in politics and higher education. Pettit, of Lewistown, served as legislative assistant to U.S. Senators James E. Murray and Lee Metcalf, campaign manager, head of transition team and assistant to Montana Governor Thomas L. Judge, taught political science at The Pennsylvania State University (main campus), was chair of political science at Montana State University, Deputy Commissioner for Academic Programs at the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Chancellor of the University System of South Texas (since merged with Texas A&M University), President of Southern Illinois University, and President of Indiana University of Pennsylvania from where he retired in 2003. He has served as chair of the Commission on Leadership for the American Council on Education, president of the National Association of (University) System Heads, and on many national and state boards and commissions in higher education. Pettit is author of “If You Live by the Sword: Politics in the Making and Unmaking of a University President.” More about Pettit is found at http://www.lawrencekpettit.com

2.4 Judge W. M. Dinwiddie Boone County, Missouri, 13th Circuit Court

Two weeks later, Judge Dinwiddie issued his decision in favor of Canada and the University. Houston was expecting this and appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court.

The Keyes to Reclaiming the Racial History Of the Roberts Court

This article advocates for a fundamental re-understanding about the way that the history of race is understood by the current Supreme Court. Represented by the racial rights opinions of Justice John Roberts that celebrate racial progress, the Supreme Court has equivocated and rendered obsolete the historical experiences of people of color in the United States. This jurisprudence has in turn reified the notion of color-blindness, consigning racial discrimination to a distant and discredited past that has little bearing to how race and inequality is experienced today. The racial history of the Roberts Court is centrally informed by the context and circumstances surrounding Brown v. Board of Education. For the Court, Brown symbolizes all that is wrong with the history of race in the United States - legal segregation, explicit racial discord, and vicious and random acts of violence. Though Roberts Court opinions suggest that some of those vestiges still exits, the bulk of its jurisprudence indicate the opposite. With Brown’s basic factual premises as its point of reference, the Court has consistently argued that the nation has made tremendous strides away from the condition of racial bigotry, intolerance, and inequity. The article accordingly argues that the Roberts Court reliance on Brown to understand racial progress is anachronistic. Especially as the nation’s focus for racial inequality turned national in scope, the same binaries in Brown that had long served to explain the history of race relations in the United States (such as Black-White, North-South, and Urban-Rural) were giving way to massive multicultural demographic and geographic transformations in the United States in the years and decades after World War II. All of the familiar tropes so clear in Brown and its progeny could no longer fully describe the current reality of shifting and transforming patterns of race relations in the United States. In order to reclaim the history of race from the Roberts Court, the article assesses a case that more accurately symbolizes the recent history and current status of race relations today: Keyes v. School District No. 1. This was the first Supreme Court case to confront how the binaries of cases like Brown proved of little probative value in addressing how and in what ways race and racial discrimination was changing in the United States. Thus, understanding Keyesand the history it reflects reveals much about how and in what ways the Roberts Court should rethink its conclusions regarding the history of race relations in the United States for the last 60 years.

Notes of proceedings and cases determined in the high court of errors and appeals, the court of chancery, and the orphans court of the state of Delaware, 1792-1832

Contains summaries of cases heard by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Appeals Court in the counties of Sussex, Kent, and Newcastle covering a variety of legal topics. Supposedly based on Wilson's Red Book.

The importance of International Developments in the case-law of the European Court of Justice: Kadi and the autonomy of the EC legal order. Research Papers in Law, 1/2009

From the Introduction. In the USA, the debate is still ongoing as to whether and to what extent the Supreme Court could or should refer to foreign precedent, in particular in relation to constitutional matters such as the death penalty.1 In the EU, in particular the recent Kadi case of 20082 has triggered much controversy,3 thereby highlighting the opposite angle to a similar discussion. The focus of attention in Europe is namely to what extent the European Court of Justice (hereafter “ECJ”) could lawfully and rightfully refuse to plainly ‘surrender’ or to subordinate the EC legal system to UN law and obligations when dealing with human rights issues. This question becomes all the more pertinent in view of the fact that in the past the ECJ has been rather receptive and constructive in forging interconnectivity between the EC legal order and international law developments. A bench mark in that respect was undoubtedly the Racke case of 1998,4 where the ECJ spelled out the necessity for the EC to respect international law with direct reference to a ruling of the International Court of Justice. This judgment which was rendered 10 years earlier than Kadi equally concerned EC/EU economic sanctions taken in implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions. A major question is therefore whether it is at all possible, and if so to determine how, to reconcile those apparently conflicting judgments.

Rules of court, 1905-1916 : made under the China orders in Council, 1904-1915, the foreign jurisdiction (admiralty) order in Council, 1910, and the China (companies) order in Council, 1915 /

At head of title: British jurisdiction in China.

The celebrated trial, Madeline Pollard vs. Breckinridge, the most noted breach of promise suit in the history of court records.

Trial of William Campbell Preston who was being sued by Miss Madeline Pollard for $50,000 in a breach of promise suit. Accused of promising to marry Miss Pollard and fathering a child and then failing to fulfill his promise. He was found guilty.

The Ontario law reports : cases determined in the Court of Appeal and in the High Court of Justice for Ontario.

Mode of access: Internet.

Cases decided in the Court of Claims of the United States at the ... with the rules of practice and the acts of Congress relating to the court /

Reporters: C.C. Mott and Archibald Hopkins, v. 8-48; William W. Scott, v. 49-50; Samuel A. Putnam, v. 51-53; Seth Shepard, v. 54-55; Harry N. Stull, v. 56-59; Ewart W. Hobbs, v. 61-74; Charles F. Kincheloe, v. 76-84; Charles F. Kincheloe and Harry N. Stull, v. 85; James A. Hoyt, v. 86-112.