La Fin De LLAffaire RojooEntre Le Sporting Lisbonne Et Doyen Sports Commentaire DDArrrt Du Tribunal FFddrallSuisse Arrrt 4a_116/2016 Du 13.12.2016 (The End of the Rojo Case Between Sporting Lisbon And Doyen Sports Commentary on the judgement of The Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland - Judgment 4a_116 / 2016 From 13.12.2016)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shervine Nafissi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Sports Commentary ◽  
Federal Supreme

Der Wald im Lichte der neueren bundesgerichtlichen Rechtsprechung | Forest legislation in the recent jurisdiction of the Federal Supreme Court

2009 ◽  
Vol 160 (9) ◽  
pp. 263-274
Author(s):  
Alois Keel ◽  
Willi Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Large Scope ◽  
Forest Law ◽  
Federal Jurisdiction ◽  
Forest Legislation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Forest Status ◽  
Area Planning ◽  
Federal Supreme

With the entry into force of the new Swiss Federal Law on Forests on the 1st of January 1993, the basis of decision-making for the Federal Supreme Court concerning forestry issues has, at least formally, fundamentally changed. This article depicts the development of the Federal Supreme Court's jurisdiction during 2000–2008 concerning the legislation on forests. The analysis of about 100 decisions reveals that the federal jurisdiction has, with regard to contents, barely changed in comparison to that of the federal law on supervision of the forest police of 1902. The most frequent causes of dispute are assessments of forest status, authorizations for deforestation, and forest distance regulations. The Federal Supreme Court merely refined the jurisdiction; it did not, or did not need to disclose fundamentally new lines [benchmarks]. It rather adheres to the restrictive definition of forest and the strict conservation of forests, while the cantons do not dispose of a large scope for the deforestation jurisdiction or the definition of the term “forest”. The Federal Supreme Court grants the cantons more freedom to regulate and implement the forest distance. Obvious changes can be observed concerning the number of forest law cases that have been dealt with by the Federal Supreme Court. Compared to the 1980ies and early 1990ies, they have decreased by more than half. Among others, reasons for this decrease are the cantons' obligation to appoint courts only as last cantonal resort, the improvement of the formal and material coordination of the proceedings, and the introduction of the “static forest term” with respect to building zones in the sense of the federal law on area planning.

scholarly journals CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE DIFUSO E O SENADO FEDERAL: LETRA MORTA NA CONSTITUIÇÃO OU INCONSTITUCIONALIDADE DAS SÚMULAS VINCULANTES?

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (Especial 2) ◽  
pp. 211-216
Author(s):  
Jessica Fernanda Alves Cavalcante ◽  
Luis Henrique Ramos Alves ◽  
Myllena Silva ◽  
Shirley Oliveira Lima Nomura
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Federal Supreme

In order to guarantee its hierarchical supremacy in the Brazilian legal system, the Federal Constitution has the so-called Constitutionality Control, and such an institute has several modalities, so that we will talk about the Diffuse Control exercised by the STF and the rule established by article 52, X, of the CF, which states that it is the responsibility of the Federal Senate to suspend the execution, in whole or in part, of a law declared unconstitutional by a final decision of the Federal Supreme Court. However, this provision of the Constitution has been considered by lawyers and jurists as a "dead letter", since EC Nº 45/04 instituted the binding summaries in Article 103-A, which has replaced said rule, stating that the STF may , officio or by provocation, after repeated decisions on constitutional matters, approve the binding summary. Faced with this is in doubt the precedent is constitutional and the competence of the Senate is dead letter or the Precedent is Unconstitutional?

The Jurisdiction of the UAE Federal Supreme Court on Constitutional Interpretation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Tarek Abo el-Wafa
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Interpretation ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Federal Supreme

Abstract While a Constitution embodies the basic principles and laws of a nation, its language and text may introduce ambiguity or confusion, especially during implementation of its laws. In such situations, interpretation of the text becomes more important than the text itself. The Federal UAE Constitution was issued in 1971 and includes a provision to specify the authority competent to interpret its contents. However, if the constitutional text that cited the interpretation jurisdiction of the Court is brief, then this research only gains important reason to explore the ambiguities of these texts and work. Therefore, this study aims to review and analyze Court rulings according to interpretation requests submitted to it from its inception to date. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to attempt to undertake the Court’s interpretative experience into a constructive legal analysis and highlight this genuine constitutional competence, which lacks a detailed discussion.

Constitutional Adjudication in Switzerland

2020 ◽  
pp. 779-840
Author(s):  
Giovanni Biaggini
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Decision Processes ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Public ◽  
Federal Laws ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
Federal Supreme

This chapter considers how constitutional adjudication is conducted in Switzerland. It debunks the notion that the Swiss constitutional system is underdeveloped with regard to constitutional adjudication. The chapter contends that Switzerland has a thoroughly respectable system of constitutional adjudication, albeit with certain idiosyncratic flaws. In particular, this applies to cantonal state authority: the cantons are subject to comprehensive constitutional adjudication. This does not exclude the results of direct democratic decision processes. The Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht; Tribunal federal, Tribunale federale) has—and makes use of—the power to review cantonal laws and to revoke them if necessary. Constitutional case law in relation to the cantons is the basis on which the Federal Supreme Court developed an extraordinarily creative jurisprudence in the twentieth century; this jurisprudence has led, inter alia, to the recognition and use of several unwritten federal fundamental rights. In addition, the chapter argues that federal laws have ceased being completely immune against any kind of constitutional review. Finally, Switzerland played an important pioneering role in the development and testing of the public law appeal (Staatsrechtliche Beschwerde).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document