Courts: Significance of the Practice of the California Supreme Court of Commenting on the Opinion of the District Court of Appeal When Denying a Hearing after Judgment

1939 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Leonard Donald Dungan
Author(s):  
Claire van Overdijk ◽  
Terence Seah

Singapore is a common law country. Judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court (High Court and Court of Appeal) and the State Courts (District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts). Pursuant to the Supreme Court of Judicature (Transfer of Mental Capacity Proceedings to District Court) Order 2010, proceedings under the Mental Capacity Act (cap 177A, 2010 Rev Ed) (‘MCA’) are now first heard by the District Court.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 714-748
Author(s):  
Cees van Dam

Two English and two Dutch cases have recently clarified the (potential) liability of parent companies vis-à-vis third parties in relation to damage caused by their subsidiaries. They concern the decisions of the UK Supreme Court in Vedanta v Lungowe and Okpabi v Shell, the Hague Court of Appeal in Oguru v Shell and the Hague District Court in Milieudefensie v Shell (climate change case).


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 636
Author(s):  
Heppi Florensia ◽  
Mety Rahmawati

Criminalization of the offender especially in the perpetrators of children under age is as a sanction that tells implied to someone who performs acts meet certain conditions. Often in prosecuting a criminal case the Public Prosecutor is wrong in deciding what articles should be imposed on the perpetrator. As one case of Supreme Court verdict No.774K/PID.SUS/2015 with 16-year-old defendant Dicky Pranata prosecuted by the Prosecutor with Article 340 of the Penal Code juncto Article 56 of the Criminal Code is a criminal act of premeditated murder, in which the elements of Article 340 of the Criminal Code are not fulfilled the defendant's self but the existence of other crimes Article 181 of the Criminal Code of disappearance committed by the defendant. The defendant was sentenced to 10 years in prison at the District Court, while the defendant was released from the sentence of the Court of Appeal and Cassation. The problem in this research is whether the act of the perpetrator fulfills the elements in Article 340 juncto Article 56 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code juncto Article 1 paragraph (3) SPPA Act and Article 181 of the Criminal Code? How to base criminal offenses in the Supreme Court ruling case No.774K/PID.SUS/2015? The researcher examines the problem with normative juridical method. Based on the analysis result that the defendant is not proven to commit element of crime Article 340 KUHP, but the existence of criminal act Article 181 of Criminal Code which has been done by defendant.


2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Bambang Sugeng Ariadi ◽  
Trisadini P. Usanti ◽  
Johan Wahyudi

In order to application of judicial principle is simple, fast and low cost is to reduce accumulation of cases in the Supreme Court especially at the level of Cassation. Along with the increasing number of incoming cases, and was sentenced in the District Court and Court of Appeal, the amount of the proposed decision legal remedy of Cassation to the Supreme Court also increased and began to be a serious problem. For that we need to do some research on role of Judiciary in Legal action restrictions in order to reduce the accumulation of civil cases. Penerapan asas peradilan yang sederhana, cepat dan biaya ringan bertujuan untuk mengurangi penumpukkan perkara di Mahkamah Agung, terutama pada tingkat Kasasi. Seiring dengan makin meningkatnya jumlah perkara yang masuk, dan diputus di PN dan PT, jumlah putusan yang diajukan upaya hukum Kasasi ke MA juga semakin meningkat dan mulai menjadi masalah serius. Untuk itu perlu dilakukan suatu penelitian tentang Peran Lembaga Peradilan dalam Pembatasan Upaya Hukum dalam rangka mengurangi penumpukkan perkara perdata.


Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 30
Author(s):  
Bambang Sugeng Ariadi S ◽  
Johan Wahyudi ◽  
Razky Akbar

The most important thing for any regulation judicial principle is simple, fast and low cost is to reduce the accumulation of cases in the Supreme Court. That is because, line with the increasing increasing number of incoming cases, and also that successfully terminated in the District Court and Court of Appeal, then the incoming number of decisions in the Supreme Court also increased and began to be a serious problem. In this regard, People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) seriously consider this and responded by provisions, that is TAP MPR No. VIII/MPR/2000 about of the Annual Report of State High Institutions at the Annual Session of the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia in 2000 which one substance recommend that the Supreme Court immediately resolve pending lawsuits by increasing the number and quality of decisions and that the Supreme Court makes the rules o restrict the entry of cassation cases. Following up on the existence of the MPR decrees, he Supreme Court has issued several provisions n order to limit legal action in order to realize judicial principle is simple, fast and low cost, either in the form of the Supreme Court Rules (Perma) nor Supreme Court Circular Letter (Sema). This article is useful for know and understand how much has been the implementation judicial principle is simple, fast and low cost, in order to reduce the buildup of civil cases. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 237-250
Author(s):  
Bernadette M Waluyo

The Indonesian Supreme Court, in response to the information era, modernizes the civil procedural rules at the district court level.  This is done by issuing Supreme Court Regulation no. 1 of 2019 re. Administration of Justice at Civil Law Courts and Electronic-Court Proceedings. Undoubtedly, modernization of existing rules on the administration of justice is much needed.  On the other hand, these changes may violate a number of procedural civil law principles.  The author argues, from a civil procedural law perspective, that the above Supreme Court regulation violates the basic principle of transparency of court proceedings and physical attendance at court proceedings. 


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sipho Stephen Nkosi

The note is about the appeal lodged by the late Mrs Winnie Madikizela-Mandela to the SCA against the decision of the Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha, dismissing her application for review in 2014. In that application, she sought to have reviewed the decision of the Minister of Land Affairs, to transfer the now extended and renovated Qunu property to Mr Mandela and to register it in his name. Because her application was out of time, she also applied for condonation of her delay in making the application. The court a quo dismissed both applications with costs, holding that there had been an undue delay on her part. Mrs Mandela then approached the Supreme Court of Appeal, for special leave to appeal the decision of the court a quo. Two questions fell for decision by the SCA: whether there was an unreasonable and undue delay on Mrs Mandela’s part in instituting review proceedings; and whether the order for costs was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The SCA held that there was indeed an unreasonable delay (of seventeen years). Shongwe AP (with Swain, Mathopo JJA, Mokgothloa and Rodgers AJJA concurring) held that the fact that there had been an undue delay does not necessarily mean that an order for costs should, of necessity, particularly where, as in this case, the other litigant is the state. It is the writer’s view that two other ancillary points needed to be raised by counsel and pronounced on by the Court: (a) the lawfulness and regularity of the transfer of the Qunu property to Mr Mandela; and (b) Mrs Mandela’s status as a customary-law widow—in relation to Mr Mandela.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-121
Author(s):  
Shamier Ebrahim

The right to adequate housing is a constitutional imperative which is contained in section 26 of the Constitution. The state is tasked with the progressive realisation of this right. The allocation of housing has been plagued with challenges which impact negatively on the allocation process. This note analyses Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Various Occupiers, Eden Park Extension 51 which dealt with a situation where one of the main reasons provided by the Supreme Court of Appeal for refusing the eviction order was because the appellants subjected the unlawful occupiers to defective waiting lists and failed to engage with the community regarding the compilation of the lists and the criteria used to identify beneficiaries. This case brings to the fore the importance of a coherent (reasonable) waiting list in eviction proceedings. This note further analyses the impact of the waiting list system in eviction proceedings and makes recommendations regarding what would constitute a coherent (reasonable) waiting list for the purpose of section 26(2) of the Constitution.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Lieneke Slingenberg

In September 2012, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld a judgment of the Hague Court of Appeal that the eviction from basic shelter of a mother and her minor children, who did not have legal residence in the Netherlands, was unlawful. This ruling was instigated by a radically new interpretation of the European Social Charter’s personal scope and caused a major shift in Dutch policy. This article provides a case study into the legal reasoning adopted by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. It argues that, instead of relying on legal doctrinal reasoning for justifying the outcome, both courts referred to factors that the general public relies on to assess people’s deservingness of welfare. This finding raises fundamental questions about the relationship between human rights law and deservingness; and calls, therefore, for further research into the relevance of deservingness criteria in judicial discourse.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document