Legal Versus Normative Incentives Under Judicial Error

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Deffains ◽  
Claude Fluet
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Error

scholarly journals Judicial error and cooperation

2016 ◽  
Vol 89 ◽  
pp. 372-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Markussen ◽  
Louis Putterman ◽  
Jean-Robert Tyran
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Error

scholarly journals Grave Judicial Errors Within the Jordanian Legal System: Causes, Legal Provisions and Solutions

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 122
Author(s):  
Alaa Mohammad Alfawaer
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Civic Responsibility ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Judicial Errors ◽  
Judicial Error

It is reasonably and logically conceivable that a judge commits a grave judicial error during the undertaking of his or her judicial work, whether related to legal principles, in the performance of his or her judicial duties or in his exercising of jurisdiction. This error is related to his or her civic responsibility, if it has resulted in damages to a member of the opposing party. Despite the importance and seriousness of such mistakes, and its long establishment, Jordanian legislation has not provided for it, and has left it to the general rules. There is no doubt that there are reasons which lead to such errors occurring and, conversely, that there are ways to avoid this error.

scholarly journals Judicial Error: Responsibility, but not the Right

2019 ◽  
pp. 4-17
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav Kurchenko
Keyword(s):  
Professional Experience ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Gradual Accumulation ◽  
Judicial Errors ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Error

In the article, the causes of judicial errors are discussed. The author examines the possibilities of imposing discipline sanctions on judges for their errors, considers a range of questions. In particular, should a judge seek the truth while hearing a case? Is a judge responsible for not only his or her errors but also for the errors of investigators, experts, and other participants of a proceeding? The author indicates various types of judicial errors and comes to a conclusion that gradual accumulation of ordinary or insignificant errors in the judge’s activity inevitably leads to systematic (or unordinary) errors. They indicate that the judge is unfair or incompetent. Drawing on personal professional experience and judicial practice, positions of the Russian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, the author makes a link between judicial errors and the quality of justice. He emphasizes that the judge should follow the legal rules concerning adjudication and maintain his or her level of competence.

scholarly journals CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA NO. 2/2017 ON THE EXTRAORDINARY APPEAL PATH OF THE REVIEW

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-75
Author(s):  
Mihaela Pătrăuș ◽  
Darius-Dennis Pătrăuș
Keyword(s):  
Central Element ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Initial Report ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
The One ◽  
Judicial Error

The central element of this extraordinary appeal is the judicial error. The review involves finding a legal error in the criminal case settled by a final judgment, which was based on an erroneous assessment of the state of affairs. Exercising appeals does not create a new procedural report, but only extends the initial report in this new procedural phase. In our judicial system, the unanimous classification is that appeals are divided into two categories: ordinary ways and extraordinary ways. Thus, before the decision, the case under Article 453 (1) (a) could be invoked as a ground for review only in favor of the convicted person or of the one to whom the waiver of the punishment or deferment of the punishment or termination of the criminal proceedings, if the review is aimed at obtaining an acquittal. Therefore, this case of revision could not be used to the detriment of the person who was acquitted or who was ordered to terminate the criminal proceedings, with the aim of reaching a decision on conviction, renunciation of the punishment or postponement of the application punishment.

Legislative Evolution in Romanian Criminal Proceedings: The Special Procedure for Compensation of Material or Moral Damages in Cases of Judicial Error

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-396
Author(s):  
Mircea Damaschin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Potential Effect ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
Judicial Error

AbstractThis article analyzes the special procedure for compensating material or moral damages where there has been a wrongful conviction—or other wrongful injury to individual liberty—caused by error in Romanian criminal proceedings.This remedy is provided for by the 1969 Romanian Criminal Procedure Code; however (perhaps inevitably), tension has risen between these provisions and those of the 1991 Romanian Constitution resulting in amendments to both the Code and the Constitution. The most significant of these amendments have flowed from decisions of the Romanian Constitutional Court; in turn, the Constitutional Court has been guided in its determinations of constitutionality by interpretations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.In the present article, the author presents the evolution of Romania's legal framework in this field, analyzing key decisions of the Romanian Constitutional Court. Also considered here is the jurisprudence of Romanian ordinary courts dealing with the compensatory remedy for material or moral damages awarded to victims of judicial error in Romanian criminal proceedings. The relevance here of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which has been critical of Romania in this regard, cannot be overestimated.Finally, this article considers the potential effect of changes contained the new Criminal Procedure Code, which has been adopted in mid-2010 by the Romanian Parliament.

Tipping the Scales – Settlement, Appeal and the Relevance of Judicial Ambition

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Christmann
Keyword(s):  
Optimal Strategy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Court System ◽  
Appellate Courts ◽  
Appeal Court ◽  
Trial Outcome ◽  
Trial Judges ◽  
Fact Finding ◽  
Judicial Error

AbstractJudges become ambitious decision makers when they face appellate review. This paper applies a contract theoretic perspective to the behavior of self-interested trial judges in a two-level court system and analyzes how different judicial stereotypes affect contracting in “the shadow of” the court. Confronted with the factual ambiguity of a case, maximizing judges pursue an (privately) optimal strategy and tip the scales of the trial outcome. The model reveals that careerist judges will deliberately allow for a certain probability of judicial error in their decisions to pursue “self-advertisement” at the appeal court. Furthermore, the strongest fact-finding judge is tempted by in-trial settlements to evade the risk of appellate review, and does not foster contract verifiability to the desirable extent. Our implications put into perspective the function of appellate courts to promote court accuracy. Additionally, a judicial tendency to conclude lawsuits through in-court settlements may strain contract output.

scholarly journals Member States’ liability for judicial error resulting in breaches of European Union Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (31) ◽  
pp. 64-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin Paul Neamt
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Errors ◽  
State Liability ◽  
Judicial Error

Abstract This paper presents the remedies available to persons whose European law rights have been infringed by judgments given by national Courts. The paper firsts presents the concept of state liability for judicial errors in relation to European law, as it stems from the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, then goes on to show how the European Court of Human Rights may give redress to such aggrieved parties. Finally, it discusses the differences in the possibility of redress given by the two courts and the compatibility between their approaches, finally leading to a discussion on the possible convergence of the two.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document