The Australian Justice system is bound by certain rules and regulations which are integral to its role on society within Australia and its differences to the rest of the world, except for one other country whereby it follows suit. Though the laws of the Australian colonies fluctuated from the United Kingdom in countless respects from the commencements of settlement, the underlying configurations of thought mirror the common law institution as received from Britain. From those essential patterns we took from the United Kingdom we gained a legal system of which bases itself on the courtroom and the societies who run it. When it comes to the final say though these configurations we have somewhat gained from giving full reign to one individual which is the focal point of any case, he/her is the reviewer, the evaluator and the arbiter or more commonly known as the judge.
This essay proposes discussions that judges are unquestionably an integral part of the Australian Justice system and divulge the key concepts and issues relating to a judges role. The existent question though is that judges are merely meant to interpret the law, granted most people distinguish or assume they make new law at their own will and on their own merit. This essay will be taking examples and complications from Australian cases and will be implementing the Harvard referencing structure.
Before the proposed question can be properly answered, the imperative dynamics of the courtroom must be discussed. The basic elements of a judge; a judge is a ceremonial overseer of main accounts in the court room. His/hers main contribution is to instil proper knowledge of specific information if need be. Essentially Judges exercise, to their fullest extent, judicial power. ...
... middle of paper ...
...
Brennan, Justice F.G. (1992) unpublished paper delivered in Canberra on 16 July to a Human Rights Conference and referred to in Connolly P. and Hulme S. (1993) The High Court of Australia in Mabo AMEC Leederville.
Constitutional Commission 1988, Final Report, AGPS, vol 1, chapt 6. Canberra.
Green, L 2012 ‘The concept of law’, (3rd edn), Clarendon law series, CPI group ltd, Croydon, Great Britain.
Kirby, M. (1993) "Looking to the courts to fight political paralysis" Sydney Morning Herald 26th October.
Mason, A 1993, ‘The Role of the Courts at the Turn of the Century’, Fifth Annual Oration in Judicial Administration, 3rd edn, Journal of Judicial Administration 156.
Mason, Sir Anthony (1987) "Future Directions in Australian Law" Monash University aw Review
Stephen, N 1989, ‘Judicial Independence’, Inaugural Annual Oration in Judicial Administration, AIJA Melbourne.
9. Woodgate, R., Black, A., Biggs, J., Owens, D. (2003). Legal Studies for Queensland, Volume 1, ForthEdition, Legal Eagle Publications: Queensland. 10. Woodgate, R., Black, A., Biggs, J., Owens, D. (2003).
Rice, S (2011) ‘Reflections on reforming discrimination laws in Australia’, Human Rights law Centre, viewed 4 October 2011, .
The major goal of the Australian prison at the beginning of the 20th century was the removal of lawbreakers from their activities in society (King, 2001). The Australian legal system relies on deterrence (Carl et al, 2011, p. 119), that is, a system that has two key assumptions: (i) specific punishments imposed on offenders will ‘deter’ or prevent them from committing further crimes (ii) the fear of punishment will prevent others from committing similar crimes (Carl et al, 2011, p. 119). However it is not always the case that deterrence is successful as people commit crime without concern for punishment, thinking that they will get away with the crime committed (Jacob, 2011). Economists argue that crime is a result of individuals making choices
The courtroom is a ritualised space, involving costume, language, spatial organisation and so on, and courts, therefore, constitute performative exercises of power. Discuss some of the ways in which courts demonstrate power and/or power relations.
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
It would not be inconsistent with the principle of equality before the law that, where members of the Aboriginal race have special needs, those should be recognised by special rules laid down by the law. Further, the law is flexible enough to allow the courts to consider the special situation of an Aboriginal party where that is relevant. As the courts have recognised, the sentencing of Aboriginal offenders presents particular difficulties. Judges, in an attempt to do justice in discharging the difficult role of sentencing tribal and semi-tribal Aboriginal persons, have gone further. Clearly the ordinary criminal law is capable of facing these difficulties. It is neither necessary, nor desirable, to apply to the Aboriginal peoples the rules of their customary law rather than the general law. The attempt to uphold Aboriginal customary law is one aspect of the notion that the Aboriginal peoples will benefit if they continue to be treated as a class separate from the rest of the community, which must necessarily be a dependent and disadvantaged class.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
The criminal justice system is composed of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. The way criminal justice systems work depends on the jurisdiction that is in charge. Different jurisdictions have different ways of managing criminal justice processes. The components of the criminal justice system are law enforcement, prosecution, defense attorneys, courts, and corrections.
pp. pp. pp Kay, H. H. (2004, Jan). Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Professor of Law.
Introduction This submission will discuss the problems created by the Doctrine of Judicial Precedent and will attempt to find solutions to them. Whereas, English Law has formed over some 900 years it was not until the middle of the 19th Century that the modern Doctrine was ‘reaffirmed’. London Tramways Co. Ltd V London County Council (1898). Law is open to interpretation, all decisions made since the birth of the English Legal System, have had some form of impact whether it is beneficial or not The term ‘Judicial Precedent’ has at least two meanings, one of which is the process where Judges will follow the decisions of previously decided cases, the other is what is known as an ‘Original Precedent’ that is a case that creates and applies a new rule. Precedents are to be found in Law Reports and are divided up into ‘Binding’ and ‘Persuasive’.
Ronald Dworkin has become one of the most influential legal philosophers over the last century providing a ‘sophisticated alternative to legal positivism’. Dworkin is a non-orthodox natural law theorist, his account of law centres on his theory of adjudication. A key aspect of adjudication is the concept of Law as Integrity. However, some commentators suggest that Dworkin’s ideal does not reflect the reality of judicial interpretation. In this paper I will outline Dworkin’s ‘law as integrity’ and then highlight some of the criticisms that appear to generate doubt over his writings as a convincing model. I will conclude that whilst his main opponents offer some substantial critiques of Dworkin’s theory of ‘law as integrity’, Dworkin does establish a convincing theory that tries to bridge the gap on judicial discretion that other notable theorists, including H.L.A. Hart, fail to achieve.
One of the features of the Australian constitution is that is it structured in a way that theoretically reflects the rule of law. This is reflected through the ‘separation of powers’ doctrine, which is assumed to be a fair structure of government. Its principles suggest that power does not lie with one branch of government, but is spread out amongst three (legislative, executive and judicial).
The English legal system is ostensibly embedded on a foundation of a ‘high degree of certainty with adaptability’ based on a steady ‘mode’ of legal reasoning. This rests on four propositions
Rackley, E (2010). In Conversation with Lord Justice Etherton: Revisiting the Case for a More Diverse Judiciary. Public Law