High Court
Article 34.3.1 of the Constitution defines the primary role of the High Court as a Court of First Instance.
“The Courts of First Instance shall include a High Court invested with full original jurisdiction in and power to determine all matters and questions whether of law or fact, civil or criminal.”
It is also noted here that the High Court has an inherent jurisdiction to hear all matters. However, while the High Court retains this power, legislation has been created to assign certain matters to specific courts. The High Court’s civil jurisdiction begins with the hearing of claims for damages amounting to more than €75,000. (Thornton, Ní Mhuirthile, O'Sullivan, 2016). These hearings can result in damages or compensation being
…show more content…
(Citizens Information, 2015). It hears appeals concerning civil matters from the High Court. This includes appeals about the constitutionality of a law. (Thornton, Ni Mhuirthile, O'Sullivan, 2016). However, it excludes cases which the Supreme Court has not given permission to the Court of Appeal to hear. (Courts Service, 2015). The Court of Appeal can overrule decisions of the High Court in certain situations, summoned by the interests of justice. (Thornton, Ni Mhuirthile, O'Sullivan, …show more content…
(Citizens Information, 2015). This is done using two types of stated procedure. The first of which is when the Circuit Court has made a final decision and the Court of Appeal decides if the decision made was correct or not. The second is consultative case stated procedure and this is used when a final decision of a case has not yet been made and one party is seeking clarification on a point of law. Also under section 8, Act 2014, the decision of the High Court on a question of law, referred by the District Court, can be appealed in the Court of
Q1 THE COURT/S IN WHICH THE CASE WAS HEARD (OUTLINE THE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF THE COURT)
The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican government, he and his fellow justices sought to perpetuate their Federalist principles in the United States’ court system. In one of the most memorable court cases of all time--the case of Marbury v. Madison-- Marshall established the idea of judicial review and strengthened the power of the judicial branch in the government. Abiding by his Federalist ideals, Marshall decided cases that would explicitly limit the power of the state government and broaden the strengths of the national government. Lastly, the Marshall Court was infamous for determining the results of cases that dealt with the interpretation of the Constitution and the importance of contracts in American society. The Marshall Court, over the span of a mere three decades, managed to influence the life of every American citizen even to this day by impacting the development of the judicial branch, establishing a boundary between the state and national government, and making declarations on the sanctity of contracts ("The Marshall Court"...
1. There are two courts that hear criminal trials, which are the Magistrates’ Court and the Crown Court.
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.
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
The Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales. - Counsel [24] See footnote 22 – but page 61 [25] GEOFFREY, Marshall, Constitutional Theory, Clarendon Law Series, Oxford 1971 Chapter1 – the Law and the constitution, part 3. Dicey’s doctrine and its critics. [26] REGINA v HER MAJESTY'S TREASURY, Ex parte SMEDLEY, [COURT OF APPEAL], [1985] Q B 657, 19 December 1984, (c)2001 The Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England & Wales [27] MITCHELL, JDB, Constitutional Law, 2nd edition, Edinburgh, W Green & SON LTD, 1968, Convention, page 31 [28] See footnote 22 but page 64
The English legal system is complex and there are many ways in which it can be influenced, this essay will explore some of the different, more obvious ways the law can be changed and what this shows in relation to the quote above. First the essay will discuss the different ways the law can be created and changed and who enables and controls those changes, with my primary examples being the common law and legislation for the judicracy and Parliament respectively, then the essay will cover to what extent these powers enable the judicracy to change and create law in relation to Parliament and if it could be discribed as "opportunistic and piecemeal".
“Article III of the U.S. Constitution describes the powers and obligations of the judicial branch, but not the power of the courts to review actions of the legislative and executive branches or declare possible actions unconstitutional,” (The Power of Judicial Review). This power was established by the decision in Marbury v. Madison and became known as judicial review (The Power of Judicial Review). Judicial review is the power to review and overturn acts of Congress, the executive branch and the states if the Court finds that these actions are unconstitutional. Namely, it gives the Supreme Court the ultimate power to interpret the Constitution. (Lecture Notes)
The UK courts obtain the power to decide whether the governmental authority has acted ‘Ultra Vires’. This ensures they do not act outside limits of their legal power, this includes both formal and substantive grounds. Both proportionality and natural justice are crucial components for judicial review of a case and therefore, formal and substantive elements are required to set out laws. There seems to be no compelling reason that this may not also be the most salient solution for the rule of law, however in my opinion, good procedures are not as rewarding as the laws content when it concerns the publics lives and
Cownie, F and Bradney, A. (2002) English Legal System in Context, London, Butterworths, pp. 293-4.
INTRODUCTION: Parliament, the supreme law-making body, has unrestricted legislative power, and the laws it passes cannot be set aside by the courts. The role of judges, in relation to laws enacted by Parliament, is to interpret and apply them, rather than to pass judgment on whether they are good or bad laws. However, evidence has shown that they have a tendency to deviate from their ‘real roles’ and instead formulate laws on their own terms. Thus, the real role of a judge in any legal system continues to be a phenomenon questioned by many.
Rackley, E (2010). In Conversation with Lord Justice Etherton: Revisiting the Case for a More Diverse Judiciary. Public Law
... Supreme Court of Justice (formerly known as the House of Lords). Courts that are considered as higher courts in the hierarchy of courts would be the Court of Appeal and the High Court.
“We are blessed in the united kingdom by a judiciary whose integrity, dependence, professional-ism and skill that is not in question. But we take such a condition for granted at our peril. Justice is a delicate plant. It has to be ruptured, protected, cared for” Straw, Jack (July, 2007).
The courts of England and Wales acknowledge that the above must be something of value, in order to amount to consideration. A valuable consideration in the perspective of the English La...