Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Historical aspects of the US court system
Strengths of the tribunal system
Methods of selecting judge
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Historical aspects of the US court system
This essay will define the role of the courts system provide some history of the courts highlight the various types of courts.with outline of civil and criminal courts and supreme courts. Pages to follow will establish the jurisdiction and hierarchy. Evalutate the advantages and disadvantages of using The jury system. With final piece to provide a conclusion
The role of the courts are to administer the law, which has had much history over centuries going back as far as Anglo-Saxon period. When local issue where decided by local customs laws. The word court brought about when justice decided by the king’s court or also known as royal court and punishments dealt with in different excessively In 1873, Parliament passed the judicature Act,
…show more content…
The aim of this essay, identify the role of the tribunal system and discuss the impact that any reforms may have had on the system.
The tribunal system in the United kingdoms is part of the national system of administrative justice with tribunals classed as non-departmental public bodies The courts structure covers England and Wales; the tribunals system covers England, Wales, and in some cases Northern Ireland. And tribunals system has its structure for dealing with cases and appeals, but decisions from different chambers of the Upper Tribunal and the Employment Appeals Tribunal may also go to the Court of Appeal. Scotland
Framework Document for Her Majesty 's Courts and Tribunals Service says its aim is "to run an efficient and effective courts and tribunals system, which enables the rule of law to be upheld and provides access to justice for all."The tribunal system of the United Kingdom is part of the national system., from 2007 reforms were put in place to build a unified system. with recognised judicial authority, routes of appeal and regulatory
…show more content…
The Lord Chancellor’s Department made its enquiries as to the most eligible candidates. Is considered that the appointment process was open to the criticism that a member of the government should not have the sole responsibility for appointing judges. It was also found that judges were nominated in the image of existing judges rather than solely on merit from a pool of widely drawn eligible candidates.
Despite the criticisms levelled at it, the former method of appointment in fact worked rather well. Candidates selected on merit, there was no question of any political consideration being involved, and Lord Chancellor usually acted on the advice of the senior judiciary, who were in a position to identify able practitioners. Selection was, however as critics pointed out, from a rather narrow pool, and this did nothing for the diversity of the judiciary.
It was considered that, while judges should be appointed on merit, if we are to have a judiciary that has the confidence of citizens, it must fairly reflect all sections of society that are in a position to provide candidates of the requisite ability. The new system of selection seeks to encourage such candidates to come forward. Open competition makes all appointments. The Commission recommends candidates
The type of elections is widely criticized for delivering less qualified results, considering the fact that the public does not have enough information on judicial candidates and their qualifications. Furthermore, judicial candidates are not allowed to take stands on controversial issues or specific cases in accordance with the Judicial Code of Conduct (Corriher, 2012).
...evidence, the committee should have adhered to the Cumberland plant HR Director’s correspondence that clearly stated that interviewers should not award points to candidates for being a “diversity candidate” and “it is really important up front before your interviews start to have a definition of what ‘Outstanding,’ ‘Well-Qualified,’ and ‘Qualified’ is. This needs to be documented and dated before the interview process starts” (Walsh, 2010). The district court found the interviewers placed candidates in these categories after the interviews and ranking had been completed. In turn, this ensured the number of “Outstanding” applicants equaled the ‘exact’ number of job openings and their candidates of choice were in the top 10 group. As a result, TVA should ensure a legitimate matrix is developed for scoring purposes and not be manipulated for preferred results.
Whether a judge should be elected or appointed has been a topic for discussion since the creation of a judicial system. Depending on what side of the decision one may be on, there are some challenges that arise from each side. If a judge is elected, will he be judicious in his decision based on the law or based on his constituents? If the judge is appointed, will he be subject to the authority that appointed him, thereby slanting his decision to keep favor of the executive or legislator that appointed him? Mandatory retirement is also a question that brings about challenges. How old is too old? When does a judge become ineffective based on their age?
The court system of any country is a fundamental aspect of the society. In this respect, there are no public institutions in Canada which are subject to public scrutiny like the court system. People expectations of how they are treated by others are guided by laws made by various levels of institutions of justice. The Canadian judicial system, particularly, has undergone major developments and challenges as well. This paper explores three published articles that report on the problem of patronage appointments what lies behind the confidence in the justice system and the relevance of gender and gender equality in the legal profession.
The federal government and the state government have its own court system. Both the federal and state court system has a hierarchically organized system. Sec.1article III of the constitution created the supreme court of the United States. This paper will compare and contrast the court system of the federal and state government. This paper will also point out the hierarchically structure of them both.
Supporters say reform is practical. for an overburdened modern legal system. The proposed changes affect an Act of 1855 allowing some crimes to be tried by magistrates instead. of a higher court if the defendant agrees.... ... middle of paper ...
The court system is composed of lawyers, judges, and juries. Their job is to ensure that everyone receives a fair trial, determine guilt or innocence, and apply sentences to guilty parties. The court system will contain one judge, and a jury of twelve citizens. The jury of the court will determine the guilt or innocence of the individual. The jury will also recommend a sentence for the crime the individual committed.
With that said after the Constitutional Convention was signed in 1787, President Washington felt it was necessary to institute the Judicial Courts, that are meant to exercise “judicial powers and to perform only judicial work” (Structure of the Federal Court System, 196). Since the country towards the end of the eighteenth century were under the Common Law rule, this step seemed sufficient to benefit the society. Before signing the Judiciary Act the founders wanted to go further than establishing a pyramid for the courts, they sent a draft for guidance. The few characteristics came from previous claims, one of the most uncomfortable features of the federal system were circuit riding in which the judges from the highest court to travel to different states to try cases. The circuit riding was basically a mirror match of the English courts, similarly the circuit courts were the major trial courts within the Federal Court System. Another issued faced by the system was the dealing of the single judge in the district courts. Through the time being the District Courts were “under limited jurisdiction over revenue, admiralty, and minor crimes” (Surrency, 7). Lastly, the distinction of between the Circuit Court and the Appellate Court, they both contained the same limited jurisdiction and could hear cases through writ of
The American Court System is an important part of American history and one of the many assets that makes America stand out from other countries. It thrives for justice through its structured and organized court systems. The structures and organizations are widely influenced by both the State and U.S Constitution. The courts have important characters that used their knowledge and roles to aim for equality and justice. These court systems have been influenced since the beginning of the United State of America. Today, these systems and law continue to change and adapt in order to keep and protect the peoples’ rights.
The next component of the criminal justice system is the court. These courts are ran by judges that make sure the law is followed and oversees what happens in the courtroom. The courts are put in place so that the judges can decide whether to release offenders before the trial, except or reject plea agreements, or sentence convicted offenders (Hoffmann, 2011). The courts provide a set of guidelines that are used to resolve disputes and to test and enforce laws in a fair and rational
It is widely acknowledged that the judiciary within England and Wales is not representative of the wider society. The composition of the judiciary is regularly subject to criticism on its apparent homogenous identity’ being largely comprised of elderly, white male barristers educated at Oxford or Cambridge. This ethos has prevented diversity within the judiciary, particularly the upper echelons of the judiciary. Academics such as John Griffith have suggested that the narrow range of the judiciary threatens to undermine public confidence in the judicial system. Similarly, Baroness Hale argues that a representative judiciary is paramount for directives associated with the promotion of equal opportunities and strengthening of judicial legitimacy. The government has attempted to combat these issues with statutory and procedural changes to the Courts and Legal Service Act 1990, the Courts Act 2003, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, and the Judicial Appointments Committee. However, the government’s reforms have made little impact on the demographic profile of the judiciary, as the cornerstone of all judicial appointments is merit. Until diversity can break into the judiciary, particularly the upper echelons of the judiciary there will continue to be a lingering threat to the publics confidence of the judiciary as diversification has yet to materialize.
...Judicial appointment eliminates the need for political pressure and allows judges to act as unbiased mediators of political disputes. In contrast, judicial elections would damage the function of state courts to uphold the law, likely be more corrupt than judicial appointment by tainting judicial integrity, and jeopardize procedural impartiality. Thus, judicial appointment is a better alternative where its benefits outweigh the defects.
These judges are to judge the people righteously. Justice should be ultimate and should not be changed or distorted. The judges are also to not take bribes from anyone or be partial. This they should do because bribing shows perversion of the righteousness, which should not be something that characterizes the judges. The main objective of these judges should be to only pursue justice in order to be able to “live and possess the land which the Lord” is giving them (NASB Deut.
The Selection, Training and Role of Magistrates in the English Legal System Lay magistrates are unqualified, part-time and unpaid profesionals who are chosen to serve in the magistrates court, yet they deal with the vast majority of cases in the legal system. They do not hear cases on their own but sit as a bench or panel of two or three other magistrates. The use of such unqualified people to judge cases is open to criticism. Magistrates sit in a magistrates court, usually in a bench of three.
The English Legal System is used in the United Kingdom and it plays a significant role in keeping orders within the country; it has the influential ability towards the United States and other commonwealth countries. Many decisions from England are in many jurisdictions are considered as persuasive.