Search results for: judicial litigation

Authors: Behnam Habibi Dargah

Abstract:

The economics of cost-benefit theory seeks to monitor claims and determine their final price. The cost of litigation is important because it is a measure of the efficiency of the justice system. From an economic point of view, the cost of litigation is considered to be the point of equilibrium of litigation, whereby litigation is regarded as a high-risk investment and is initiated when the costs are less than the probable and expected benefits. Costs are economically separated into private and social costs. Private cost includes material (direct and indirect) and spiritual costs. The social costs of litigation are also subsidized-centric due to the public and governmental nature of litigation and cover both types of bureaucratic bureaucracy and the costs of judicial misconduct. Macroeconomic policy in the economics of justice is the reverse engineering of controlling the social costs of litigation by employing selective litigation and working on the judicial culture to achieve rationality in the monopoly system. Procedures for controlling and managing court costs are also circumscribed to economic patterns in the field. Rational cost allocation model and cost transfer model. The rational allocation model deals with cost-tolerance systems, and the transfer model also considers three models of transferability, including legal, judicial and contractual transferability, which will be described and explored in the present article in a comparative manner.

Keywords: cost of litigation, economics of litigation, private cost, social cost, cost of litigation

Procedia PDF Downloads 91

Authors: Shreeya Umashankar

Abstract:

The Supreme Court of India has emerged as the most powerful organ of State and amongst the foremost constitutional courts in the world through the instrument of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the exercise of writ jurisdiction and the expansive interpretation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Judicial activism impinging on every facet of governance has become the norm in recent times. This paper traces the evolution of judicial activism since Independence through pronouncements of the Supreme Court. It brings out distinct phases in this evolution– the initial phase of judicial restraint, the first phase of an activist judiciary where the Supreme Court primarily was concerned with protection of fundamental rights and humane treatment of citizens; the second phase where the Supreme Court took keen interest in preservation and protection of the environment; the third phase where the Supreme Court extended its reach into the socio-economic arena and the fourth phase when issues of transparency and probity in governance led to interventions by the Supreme Court. The paper illustrates through judgements of the Supreme Court that the instrument of the PIL and the exercise of writ jurisdiction by the Supreme Court go beyond the traditional postulates of judicial processes and political theory on separation of powers between the organs of State.

Keywords: fundamental rights, judicial activism, public interest litigation, Supreme Court of India

Procedia PDF Downloads 588

Authors: M. van der Bank, C. M. van der Bank

Abstract:

Alternative Dispute Resolution denotes all forms of dispute resolution other than litigation or adjudication through the courts. This definition of Alternative Dispute Resolution, however, makes no mention of a vital consideration. ADR is the generally accepted acronym for alternative dispute resolution. Despite the choice not to proceed before a court or statutory tribunal, ADR will still be regulated by law and by the Constitution. Fairness is one of the core values of the South African constitutional order. Environmental disputes occur frequently, but due to delays and costs, ADR is a mechanism to resolve this kind of disputes which is a resolution of non-judicial mechanism. ADR can be used as a mechanism in environmental disputes that are less expensive and also more expeditious than formal litigation. ADR covers a broad range of mechanisms and processes designed to assist parties in resolving disputes creatively and effectively. In so far as this may involve the selection or design of mechanisms and processes other than formal litigation, these mechanisms and processes are not intended to supplant court adjudication, but rather to supplement it. A variety of ADR methods have been developed to deal with numerous problems encountered during environmental disputes. The research questions are: How can ADR facilitate environmental disputes in South Africa? Are they appropriate? And what improvements should be made?

Keywords: alternative dispute, environmental disputes, non-judicial, resolution and settlement

Procedia PDF Downloads 202

Authors: Rafael Bezerra de Souza, José Ribas Vieira

Abstract:

The judicial litigation on socio-economic rights (SERs), in a context of increasing centrality of the judiciary as an area of political debate for civil society actors, has assumed greater importance in the last two decades. This tendency to seek social change through the courts generated a long tradition of research on the role of legal institutions and of legal mobilization in the US and some European countries. However, little is known about these processes in Latin America, Asia and Africa. A significant portion of the Brazilian constitutional doctrine did not bother to investigate the phenomenon of constitutional judicial litigation of socio-economic rights, in a practical and empirical look, from the functioning of democratic institutions. The central issue of this study draws attention to the theoretical and analytic deficit of Brazilian constitutional doctrine: the lack of a holistic understanding of the effects and impact of judicial decisions. Consequently, for a proper understanding was analyzed if the trend of judicial litigation in Brazil - to ensure the fulfillment of its institutional mission to protect and ensure the effectiveness of socio-economic rights - has been accompanied by the establishment of institutional mechanisms that enable decision making and the implementation of SERs in complex cases involving structural and public policy. The lack of empirical studies in Law in order to verify this hypothesis justified the adoption of the case study method as an interdisciplinary methodological strategy between Law and Political Science, aiming to construct an explanation of the Raposa Serra do Sol Case and, in a complementary way, the process-tracing technique. Drawings of small-n type or case studies, when guided by theory, are more suitable to problems it is supposed to increase the potential of intensive analysis of causal processes. As a preliminary result, the Brazilian Supreme Court was not a sufficient agent to implement a relevant social change and to assure the protection of the social rights, because there were few measures that directly impacted the behavior of other institutional political actors and should, therefore, be considered another actor within a complex institutional arrangement.

Keywords: courts, case study, judicial litigation, social change

Procedia PDF Downloads 400

Authors: Brian Carey Sims

Abstract:

The current study examines psychological factors relevant to child custody litigation among African American fathers. Thirty-seven fathers engaged in various stages of custody litigation involving their children were surveyed about their perceptions of racial stereotypes, parental motivations, and racialized dynamics of the court/ legal process. Data were analyzed using a Critical Race Theory model designed to statistically isolate fathers’ perceptions of the existence and maintenance of structural racism through the legal process. Results indicate significant correlations between fathers’ psychological measures and structural outcomes of their cases. Findings are discussed in terms of ethical implications for family court judicial systems and attorney practice.

Keywords: ethics, family, legal psychology, policy, race

Procedia PDF Downloads 316

Authors: Masood Ahmed

Abstract:

There is a plethora of literature (including judicial and extra-judicial comments) concerning the virtues of alternative dispute resolution processes within the English civil justice system. Lord Woolf in his Access to Justice Report ushered in a new pro-ADR philosophy and this was reinforced by Sir Rupert Jackson in his review of civil litigation costs. More recently, Briggs LJ, in his review of the Chancery Court, reiterated the significant role played by ADR and the need for better integration of ADR processes within the Chancery Court. His Lordship also noted that ADR which had failed to produce a settlement (i.e. a failed-ADR) continued to play a significant role in contributing to a ‘substantial narrowing of the issues or increased focus on the key issues’ which were ‘capable of assisting both the parties and the court in the economical determination of the dispute at trial.’ With the assistance of empirical data, this paper investigates the nature of failed-ADR and, in particular, assesses the effectiveness of failed-ADR processes as a tool in: (a) narrowing the legal and/or factual issues which may assist the courts in more effective and efficient case management of the dispute; (b) assisting the parties in the future settlement of the matter. This paper will also measure the effectiveness of failed-ADR by considering the views and experiences of legal practitioners who have engaged in failed-ADR.

Keywords: English civil justice system, alternative dispute resolution processes, civil court process, empirical data from legal profession regarding failed ADR

Procedia PDF Downloads 438

Authors: Asem Bani Amer

Abstract:

This study handles the linguistic fingerprint in judicial applications described in a law technicality that is recent and developing. It can be adopted to discover criminals by identifying their way of speaking and their special linguistic expressions. This is achieved by understanding the expression "linguistic fingerprint," its concept, and its extended domain, then revealing some of the linguistic fingerprint tools in Western judicial applications and deducing a technical imagination for a linguistic fingerprint in the Arabic language, which is needy for such judicial applications regarding this field, through dictionaries, language rhythm, and language structure.

Keywords: linguistic fingerprint, judicial, application, dictionary, picture, rhythm, structure

Procedia PDF Downloads 53

Authors: Botirjon Kosimov

Abstract:

This work sheds light on the reforms towards the independence of the judiciary in Uzbekistan, as well as issues of further ensuring judicial independence in the country based on international values, particularly the legal practice of the United States. In every democratic state infringed human rights are reinstated and violated laws are protected by the help of justice based on the strict principle of judicial independence. The realization of this principle in Uzbekistan has been paid much attention since the proclamation of its independence. In the country, a series of reforms have been implemented in the field of the judiciary in order to actualize the principle of judicial independence. Uzbekistan has been reforming the judiciary considering both international and national values and practice of foreign countries. While forming a democratic state based on civil society, Uzbekistan shares practice with the most developed countries in the world. The United States of America can be a clear example which is worth learning how to establish and ensure an independent judiciary. It seems that although Uzbekistan has reformed the judiciary efficiently, it should further reform considering the legal practice of the United States.

Keywords: dependent judges, independent judges, judicial independence, judicial reforms, judicial life tenure, obstacles to judicial independence

Procedia PDF Downloads 231

Authors: Abdul Salim Amin

Abstract:

This paper focuses on how judiciaries in post-conflict society gain legitimacy through reformation. Legitimacy plays a pivotal role in shaping peoples’ behavior to submit to the law and verifies the rightfulness of an organ for taking binding decisions. Among various dynamics, judicial independence, access to justice and behavioral changes of the judicial officials broadly contribute in legitimation of judiciary in general, and the court in particular. Increasing the independence of judiciary through reform limits the interference of governmental branches in judicial issues and protects basic rights of the citizens. Judicial independence does not only matter in institutional terms, individual independence also influences the impartiality and integrity of judges, which can be increased through education and better administration of justice. Finally, access to justice as an intertwined concept both at the legal and moral spectrum of judicial reform avails justice to the citizen and increases the level of public trust and confidence. Efficient legal decisions on fostering such elements through holistic reform create a rule of law atmosphere. Citizens do not accept illegitimate judiciary and do not trust its decisions. Lack of such tolerance and confidence deters the rule of law and, thus, undermines the democratic development of a society.

Keywords: legitimacy, judicial reform, judicial independence, access to justice, legal training, informal justice, rule of law

Procedia PDF Downloads 471

Authors: Linda Muswaka

Abstract:

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ranks the Constitution as the Supreme law of the Republic. Law or conduct, inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency. The Constitution binds all persons and legislative, executive and judicial organs of the State at all levels of government. The Constitution embodies a Bill of Rights and expressly allows for judicial review. The introduction of a chapter of rights requires the judiciary to examine the decisions of the legislature and the executive. In a situation where these conflicts with the Bill of Rights, the judiciary have the constitutional power to overrule such decisions. In exercising its adjudicatory and interpretative powers, the judiciary sometimes arrives at unpopular decisions and accusations of judicial overreach are made. A problem, therefore, emerges on the issue of the separation of powers and judicial review. This paper proposes to, through the South African perspective, investigate the application of the doctrine of separation of powers and judicial review. In this regard, the qualitative method of research will be employed. The reason is that it is best suited to this type of study which entails a critical analysis of legal issues. The following findings are made: (i) a complete separation of powers is not possible. This is because some overlapping of the functions of the three branches of state are unavoidable; (ii) the powers vested in the judiciary does not make it more powerful than the executive and the legislature; (iii) interference by the judiciary in matters concerning other branches is not automatically, judicial overreach; and (iv) if both the executive and legislative organs of government adhere to their constitutional obligations there would be a decrease in the need for judicial interference through court adjudication. The researcher concludes by submitting that the judiciary should not derogate from their constitutionally mandated function of judicial review. The rationale being that that if the values contained in the Constitution are not scrupulously observed and their precepts not carried out conscientiously, the result will be a constitutional crisis of great magnitude.

Keywords: constitution, judicial review, judicial overreach, separation of powers

Procedia PDF Downloads 180

Authors: Lung-Lung Hu

Abstract:

Ronald Dworkin offered a legal theory of ‘chain enterprise’ that all the judges in legal history altogether create a ‘law’ aiming a specific purpose. Those judges are like co-writers of a chain-story who not only create freely but also are constrained by the story made by the judges before them. The law created by Chinese traditional judges is another case, they, compared with the judges mentioned by Ronald Dworkin, have relatively narrower space of making a legal sentence according to their own discretions because the statutes in Chinese traditional law at the very beginning have been designed as panel code that leaves small room to judge’s discretion. Furthermore, because law is a representative of the authority of the government, i.e. the emperor, any misjudges and misuses deviated from the law will be considered as a challenge to the supreme power. However, different from judges as the defenders of law, Chinese litigation masters who want to win legal cases have to be offenders challenging the verdict that does not favor his or his client’s interest. Besides, litigation master as an illegal or non-authorized profession does not belong to any legal system, therefore, they are relatively freer to ‘create’ the law. According to Stanley Fish’s articles that question Ronald Dworkin and Owen Fiss’ ideas about law, he construes that, since law is made of language, law is open to interpretations that cannot be constrained by any rules or any particular legal purposes. Stanley Fish’s idea can also be applied on the analysis about the stories of Chinese litigation masters in traditional Chinese literature. These Chinese litigation masters’ legal opinions in the so-called chain enterprise are like an unexpected episode that tries to revise the fixed story told by law. Although they are not welcome to the officials and also to the society, their existence is still a phenomenon representing another version of justice different from the official’s and can be seen as a de-structural power to the government. Hence, in this present paper the language and strategy applied by Chinese litigation masters in Chinese legal stories will be analysed to see how they refute made legal judgments and challenge the official standard of justice.

Keywords: Chinese legal stories, interdisciplinary, litigation master, post-structuralism

Procedia PDF Downloads 355

Authors: Mariam Shah

Abstract:

This paper will examine the potential influence and role of unconscious cognition on judicial decision making. The theoretical underpinnings of this paper rest on phenomenological theory grounded predominantly in Schutzian phenomenology. Aspects of Husserlian and Gadamerian phenomenology will be included within the phenomenological framework put forward in this paper, in an attempt to provide a more complete and thorough account of how unconscious cognition can influence judicial decision making. This paper has far reaching implications, as the framework provides a foundation for unconscious cognitive factors which can work to influence decision making more generally.

Keywords: decision making, Gadamer, Gadamerian, Husserl, Husserlian, judicial decision making, phenomenology, Schutz, Schutzian

Procedia PDF Downloads 381

Authors: G. A. Kuanaliyeva, G. T. Aigarinova, G. K. Shulanbekova

Abstract:

This article is devoted to judicial control in criminal legal proceedings of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the light of the new Concept of legal policy till 2020. In article the general characteristic and concept of judicial control, and also its signs and types are considered. Different views of scientists are analyzed. Foreign experiment on application of judicial control is given. The author states also the point sight on this problem and gives the definition to concept of judicial control. The code of criminal procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan (RK Criminal Procedure Code) doesn't consolidate concept of judicial control. The author in article suggests making change and addition to the existing Code of criminal procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan by definition of judicial control. The decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan of August 24, 2009 No. 858 approved the Concept of legal policy of the Republic for the period from 2010 to 2020. The new Concept of legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, defines prospects of development of national legal system of the country on the following decade. The concept of legal policy completely mentions also institute of judicial control. Since finding of the independence by Kazakhstan the set of laws, including the rights directed on providing, freedoms and a legitimate interest of citizens was accepted. Certainly, in any country, whatever democratic it was, there are problems to human rights. However, it is obvious that Kazakhstan strongly intends to guarantee all Republic of Kazakhstan proclaimed in the Constitution the rights and freedoms of the citizens. Our country seeks for creation of the constitutional state, tries to provide a guarantee from various arbitrariness in activity of competent government bodies, officials. In the concept of legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan it is specified: "...priority of development of the criminal procedure right there is a further consecutive realization of the fundamental principles of the criminal legal proceedings directed on protection of the rights and freedoms of the person". Judicial control just also is such guarantee.

Keywords: rights and freedoms of the person, concept, legal policy, court, judicial control

Procedia PDF Downloads 470

Authors: Balamurugan L.

Abstract:

Artificial intelligence (AI) and its applications in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) has been significantly growing in recent years. In last couple of years, AI tools for Patent Research and Patent Analytics have been well-stabilized in terms of accuracy of references and representation of identified patent insights. However, AI tools for Patent Prosecution and Patent Litigation are still in the nascent stage and there may be a significant potential if such market is explored further. Our research is primarily focused on identifying potential whitespaces and schematic algorithms to automate the Patent Prosecution and Patent Litigation Process of the Intellectual Property. The schematic algorithms may assist leading AI tool developers, to explore such opportunities in the field of Intellectual Property. Our research is also focused on identification of pitfalls of the AI. For example, Information Security and its impact in IPR, and Potential remediations to sustain the IPR in the digital environment.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, patent analytics, patent drafting, patent litigation, patent prosecution, patent research

Procedia PDF Downloads 37

Authors: Mariam Shah

Abstract:

Stereotypes are not generally considered to be an acceptable influence upon any decision making process, particularly those involving judicial decision making outcomes. Yet, we are confronted with an uncomfortable truth that stereotypes may be operating to influence judicial outcomes. Variances in sentencing outcomes are not easily explained away by criminological, psychological, or sociological theorem, but may be answered via qualitative research produced within the field of phenomenology. This paper will examine the current literature pertaining to the effect of stereotypes on the criminal justice system within the UK, and will also discuss what the implications are for stereotypical influences upon decision making in the criminal justice system. This paper will give particular focus to shoplifting offences dealt with in UK criminal courts, but this research has long reaching implications for the criminal process more generally.

Keywords: decision making, judicial decision making, phenomenology, shoplifting, stereotypes

Procedia PDF Downloads 297

Authors: Jacquelyn Burkell, Jane Bailey

Abstract:

Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions deployed within the justice system face the critical task of providing acceptable explanations for decisions or actions. These explanations must satisfy the joint criteria of public and professional accountability, taking into account the perspectives and requirements of multiple stakeholders, including judges, lawyers, parties, witnesses, and the general public. This research project analyzes and integrates two existing literature on explanations in order to propose guidelines for explainable AI in the justice system. Specifically, we review three bodies of literature: (i) explanations of the purpose and function of 'explainable AI'; (ii) the relevant case law, judicial commentary and legal literature focused on the form and function of reasons for judicial decisions; and (iii) the literature focused on the psychological and sociological functions of these reasons for judicial decisions from the perspective of the public. Our research suggests that while judicial ‘reasons’ (arguably accurate descriptions of the decision-making process and factors) do serve similar explanatory functions as those identified in the literature on 'explainable AI', they also serve an important ‘justification’ function (post hoc constructions that justify the decision that was reached). Further, members of the public are also looking for both justification and explanation in reasons for judicial decisions, and that the absence of either feature is likely to contribute to diminished public confidence in the legal system. Therefore, artificially automated judicial decision-making systems that simply attempt to document the process of decision-making are unlikely in many cases to be useful to and accepted within the justice system. Instead, these systems should focus on the post-hoc articulation of principles and precedents that support the decision or action, especially in cases where legal subjects’ fundamental rights and liberties are at stake.

Keywords: explainable AI, judicial reasons, public accountability, explanation, justification

Procedia PDF Downloads 94

Authors: Sonia Anand Knowlton

Abstract:

There are some cases where we as a society feel deeply uncomfortable with the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the judicial decision-making process, and justifiably so. A perfect example is COMPAS, an algorithmic model that predicts recidivism rates of offenders to assist in the determination of their bail conditions. COMPAS turned out to be extremely racist: it massively overpredicted recidivism rates of Black offenders and underpredicted recidivism rates of white offenders. At the same time, there are certain uses of AI in the judicial decision-making process that many would feel more comfortable with and even support. Take, for example, a “super-breathalyzer,” an (albeit imaginary) tool that uses AI to deliver highly detailed information about the subject of the breathalyzer test to the legal decision-makers analyzing their drunk-driving case. This article evaluates the point at which a judge’s use of AI tools begins to undermine the public’s trust in the administration of justice. It argues that the answer to this question depends on whether the AI tool is in a role in which it must perform a moral evaluation of a human being.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, judicial reasoning, morality, technology, algorithm

Procedia PDF Downloads 33

Authors: Mariam Shah

Abstract:

Strict liability is frequently used in magistrate’s courts for TV license and driving offences.There is existing research suggesting that the strict liability approach to criminal offences can result in ‘absurd’ judicial outcomes, or potentially ‘injustice’.This paper will discuss the potential merits of strict liability as a method for dealing with shoplifting offences.Currently, there is disparity in sentencing outcomes in the UK, particularly in relation to shoplifting offences.This paper will question whether ‘injustice’ is actually in the differentiation of defendants based upon their ‘perceived’ circumstances, which could be resulting in arbitrary judicial decision making.

Keywords: arbitrary, decision making, judicial decision making, shoplifting, stereotypes, strict liability

Procedia PDF Downloads 284

Authors: Uzma Fakhar, Osama Fakhar, Aamir Shafiq Ch

Abstract:

Methods of alternate dispute resolution (ADR) like conciliation, arbitration, mediation are the supplement to ensure inexpensive and expeditious justice in a country. Justice delayed has not only created chaos, but an element of rebellious behavior towards judiciary is being floated among people. Complexity of traditional judicial system and its diversity has created an overall coherence. Admittedly, In Pakistan the traditional judicial system has failed to achieve its goals which resulted in the backlog of cases pending in courts, resultantly even the critics of alternate dispute resolution agree to restore the spirit of expeditious justice by reforming the old Panchayat system. The Government is keen to enact certain laws and make amendments to facilitate the resolution of a dispute through a simple and faster ADR framework instead of a lengthy and exhausting complex trial in order to create proliferation and faith in alternate dispute resolution. This research highlights the value of ADR in a country like Pakistan for revival of the confidence of the people upon the judicial process and a useful judicial tool to reduce the pressure on the judiciary.

Keywords: alternate dispute resolution, development of law, expeditious justice, Pakistan

Procedia PDF Downloads 186

Authors: Samuel Holder

Abstract:

Mass incarceration in the United States is a human rights issue, not merely a civil rights problem. It is a human rights problem not only because the United States has a high rate of incarceration, but more importantly because of who is jailed, for what purpose they are jailed and, ultimately, the manner in which they are jailed. To sustain the scale of the criminal justice system, one of the darker policies involves a multi-tiered strategy of fee- and fine-collection, targeting, usually, the most vulnerable and poor, many of whom run into the law via small offenses that do not rise to the level of felonies. This paper advances the notion that this debt collection-to-incarceration pipeline is tantamount to a modern-day debtors’ prison system. This article seeks to confront the thorny issue of incarceration via criminal justice debt from a human rights and cause-lawyering position. It will argue that a two-pronged cause-lawyering strategy: the first focused on traditional litigation along constitutional grounds, and the second, an advocacy approach rooted in grassroots campaigns, designed to shift the normative operation and understanding of the rights of marginalized and racialized offenders. Ultimately, the argument suggests that this approach will be effective in combatting the (often highly privatized) criminal justice debt system and bring the roles of 'incapacitation, rehabilitation, deterrence, and retribution' back into the criminal justice legal conversation. Part I contextualizes and historicizes the role of fees, penalties, and fines in American criminal justice. Part II examines the emergence of private industry in the criminal justice system, and its role in the acceleration of profit-driven criminal justice debt collection and incarceration. Part III addresses the failures of the federal and state law and legislation in combatting predatory incarceration and debt collection in the criminal justice system, particularly as waged against the indigent and/or ethnically or racially marginalized. Part IV examines the potential for traditional cause-lawyering litigation along constitutional grounds, using case studies across contexts for illustration. Finally, Part V will review the radical cause-lawyer’s role in the normative struggle in redefining prisoners’ rights and the rights of the marginalized (and racialized) as they intersect at the crossroads of criminal justice debt. This paper will conclude with recommendations for litigation and advocacy, drawing on hypotheses advanced, and informed by case studies from a variety of both national and international jurisdictions.

Keywords: cause-lawyering, criminal justice debt, human rights, judicial fees

Procedia PDF Downloads 135

Authors: Sonia Anand Knowlton

Abstract:

In many ways, judges can express their personality within and beyond their role as a judge. Judges can use their unique backgrounds and life experiences to inform their legal reasons and can also participate in certain extrajudicial activities outside of their role on the bench. For many judges, the line between the expression of this judicial personality, on the one hand, and the consequence of jeopardizing the public’s perception of their impartiality, on the other, is ambiguous if not wholly unclear. In the famous Canadian decision R v RDS, for instance, a Black judge who was hearing a case about police violence against a Black person was accused of being biased after she acknowledged that her community’s racial dynamics may have impacted the police’s conduct. Many within the legal community might find comfort in the belief that judges do not need to bring their ‘personality’ to the bench in order to uncover the law’s truths and impartially apply it. Indeed, and for a good reason, judges are often discouraged from allowing their personality to shine through in their role as a judge – because the expression of judicial personality can compromise the public perception of the impartiality of the administration of justice. This paper evaluates the theoretical constraints on the expression of judicial personality as a tool for legal decision-making and argues that judges from minority groups are held to a higher level of impartiality. Specifically, minority judges are disproportionately constrained from 1) using life experience to apply the law and 2) engaging in certain extrajudicial activities.

Keywords: judging, legal decision making, judicial personality, extrajudicial activities

Procedia PDF Downloads 34

Authors: D. Avnieli

Abstract:

Immunity of judges from liability represents a departure from the principle that all are equal under the law, and that victims may be granted compensation from their offenders. The purpose of the study is to determine if judicial immunity coincides with the need to ensure the existence of highly independent and incorruptible judiciary. Judges are immune from civil and criminal liability for their judicial acts. Judicial immunity is justified by the need to maintain complete independence and discretion of the judiciary. Scholars and judges believe that absolute immunity is needed to shield judges from pressures, threats, or outside interference. It is commonly accepted, that judges should be free to perform their judicial role in accordance with their assessment of the fact and their understanding of the law, without any restrictions, influences, inducements or interferences. In most countries, immunity applies when judges act in excess of jurisdiction. In some countries, it applies even when they act maliciously or corruptly. The only exception to absolute immunity applicable in all judicial systems is when judges act without jurisdiction over the subject matter. The Israeli Supreme Court recently decided to embrace absolute immunity and strike off a lawsuit of a refugee, who was unlawfully incarcerated. The Court ruled that the plaintiff cannot sue the State or the judge for damages. The questions of malice, dignity, and public scrutiny were not discussed. This paper, based on comparative analysis of many cases, aims to determine if immunity affects the dignity and behavior of judges. It demonstrates that most judges maintain their dignity and ethical code of behavior, but sometimes do not hesitate to act consciously in excess of jurisdiction, and in rare cases even corruptly. Therefore, in order to maintain independent and incorruptible judiciary, immunity should not be applied where judges act consciously in excess of jurisdiction or with malicious incentives.

Keywords: incorruptible judiciary, immunity, independent, judicial, judges, jurisdiction

Procedia PDF Downloads 74

Authors: Ellen McClure

Abstract:

It is generally well-known that a number of inmates suffer from some form of substance or alcohol use disorder. This study identifies, analyses, classifies and codifies the most recent Canadian criminal judgments involving an accused diagnosed with an alcohol use disorder specifically. From this research, patterns in judicial discourse and sentencing norms can be established, and these findings can be juxtaposed with existing relevant academic literature, particular attention will be given to this discussion at the sentencing stage, and the subsequent incarceration of those with alcohol use disorders. This topic will be explored with an overarching emphasis on the effects that a lack of conversation regarding a possible correlation between alcohol consumption and crime may have. Although comparisons may be made in order to clarify or highlight certain issues, particular attention will be paid to jurisdictions within Canada. This paper explores the existing judicial discourse in sentencing regarding the relationship between alcohol and crime, and how this might explain the higher incarceration rates of those suffering from alcohol use disorders in Canada. The research questions are as follows: (1) What are the existing judicial discourses in sentencing around the relationship between alcohol and crime? (2) To what extent has the current discourse on alcohol addiction among judges and legal academics contributed to the incarceration of alcoholics?The major findings of this research indicate a strong correlation between a lack of judicial discussion regarding the accused’s alcohol use disorder and an increased tendency to consider an alcohol use disorder as an aggravating factor. Furthermore, it was found that an 82% of judges who discussed the alcohol use disorder meaningfully referred to the disorder as a mitigating factor. This can be compared with 6.7% of judges who referred to the alcohol use disorder as a mitigating factor in cases where the disorder was not meaningfully discussed.

Keywords: alcohol use disorder, addiction, criminal justice, judicial discourse

Procedia PDF Downloads 229

Authors: Alena Skalon, Jennifer L. Beaudry

Abstract:

Eyewitness misidentifications can sometimes lead to wrongful convictions of innocent people. This occurs in part because jurors tend to believe confident eyewitnesses even when the identification took place under suggestive conditions. Empirical research demonstrated that jurors are often unaware of the factors that can influence the reliability of eyewitness identification. Most common legal safeguards that are designed to educate jurors about eyewitness evidence are judicial instructions and expert testimony. To date, very few studies assessed the effectiveness of judicial instructions and most of them found that judicial instructions make jurors more skeptical of eyewitness evidence or do not have any effect on jurors’ judgments. Similar results were obtained for expert testimony. However, none of the previous studies focused on the ability of legal safeguards to improve jurors’ assessment of evidence obtained from suggestive identification procedures—this is one of the gaps addressed by this paper. Furthermore, only three studies investigated whether legal safeguards improve the ultimate accuracy of jurors’ judgments—that is, whether after listening to judicial instructions or expert testimony jurors can differentiate between accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses. This presentation includes two studies. Both studies used genuine eyewitnesses (i.e., eyewitnesses who watched the crime) and manipulated the suggestiveness of identification procedures. The first study manipulated the presence of judicial instructions; the second study manipulated the presence of one of two types of expert testimony: a traditional, verbal expert testimony or expert testimony accompanied by visual aids. All participant watched a video-recording of an identification procedure and of an eyewitness testimony. The results indicated that neither judicial instructions nor expert testimony affected jurors’ judgments. However, consistent with the previous findings, when the identification procedure was non-suggestive, jurors believed accurate eyewitnesses more often than inaccurate eyewitnesses. When the procedure was suggestive, jurors believed accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses at the same rate. The paper will discuss the implications of these studies and directions for future research.

Keywords: expert testimony, eyewitness evidence, judicial instructions, jurors’ decision making, legal safeguards

Procedia PDF Downloads 144

Authors: Emma Carr, Bilal Aslam-Pervez, David Laraway

Abstract:

Litigation against surgeons and hospitals continues to increase in Western countries. While verbal consent is all that is required legally, it has for a long time been considered that written consent offers proof of discussion and interaction between the surgeon and the patient. Inadequate consenting of patients continues in the United Kingdom leaving surgeons and Health Trusts open to litigation. We present a standardised consent form which improves patient autonomy and engagement. The General Medical Council recommends that all material risks relevant to the patient are discussed and recorded prior to undergoing surgery, regardless of how likely they are to occur. Current literature was reviewed to evaluate complications associated with surgical management of mandible fractures. Analysis of risks on 52 consent forms were analysed within the Glasgow OMFS department, leading to a procedure-specific form being designed and implemented. This audit showed that the documentation of risks on consent forms was extremely variable- with uncommon risks not being recorded. Interestingly, not a single consent form was found which highlighted all the risks associated with mandible fractures. Our re-audit data confirms 100% of risks being discussed when a procedure specific form is utilised. Our hope, is to introduce further forms for inclusion on the BAOMS website and peripheral distribution. The forms are quick and easy to print and leave more time for consultation with the patient. Whilst we are under no illusion that the forms may not decrease the incidence of intended litigation, we feel confident that they will decrease the chances of it being successful.

Keywords: consent, litigation, mandible fracture, surgery

Procedia PDF Downloads 158

Authors: Tom Hickey

Abstract:

It is difficult to conceive of a case that might more starkly bring the arguments concerning judicial review to the fore than State (Ryan) v Lennon. Small wonder that it has attracted so much scholarly attention, although the fact that almost all of it has been in an Irish setting is perhaps surprising, given the illustrative value of the case in respect of a philosophical quandary that continues to command attention in all developed constitutional democracies. Should judges have power to invalidate legislation? This article revisits Ryan v Lennon with an eye on the importance of the idea of “democracy” in the case. It assesses the meaning of democracy: what its purpose might be and what practical implications might follow, specifically in respect of judicial review. Based on this assessment, it argues for a particular institutional model for the vindication of constitutional rights. In the context of calls for the drafting of a new constitution for Ireland, however forlorn these calls might be for the moment, it makes a broad and general case for the abandonment of judicial supremacy and for the taking up of a model in which judges have a constrained rights reviewing role that informs a more robust role that legislators would play, thereby enhancing the quality of the control that citizens have over their own laws. The article is in three parts. Part I assesses the exercise of judicial power over legislation in Ireland, with the primary emphasis on Ryan v Lennon. It considers the role played by the idea of democracy in that case and relates it to certain apparently intractable dilemmas that emerged in later Irish constitutional jurisprudence. Part II considers the concept of democracy more generally, with an eye on overall implications for judicial power. It argues for an account of democracy based on the idea of equally shared popular control over government. Part III assesses how this understanding might inform a new constitutional arrangement in the Irish setting for the vindication of fundamental rights.

Keywords: constitutional rights, democracy as popular control, Ireland, judicial power, republican theory, Ryan v Lennon

Procedia PDF Downloads 505

Authors: Antonio Davola

Abstract:

Moving from the evaluations operated by Richard Posner in his judgment on the case Carhart v. Halaska, the paper seeks to analyse the so-called ‘litigation troll’ phenomenon and the development of a damage claims market, i.e. a market in which the right to propose claims is voluntary exchangeable for money and can be asserted by private buyers. The aim of our study is to assess whether the implementation of a ‘damage claims market’ might represent a resource for victims or if, on the contrary, it might operate solely as a speculation tool for private investors. The analysis will move from the US experience, and will then focus on the EU framework. Firstly, the paper will analyse the relation between the litigation troll phenomenon and the patent troll activity: even though these activities are considered similar by Posner, a comparative study shows how these practices significantly differ in their impact on the market and on consumer protection, even moving from similar economic perspectives. The second part of the paper will focus on the main specific concerns related to the litigation trolling activity. The main issues that will be addressed are the risk that the circulation of damage claims might spur non-meritorious litigation and the implications of the misalignment between the victim of a tort and the actual plaintiff in court arising from the sale of a claim. In its third part, the paper will then focus on the opportunities and benefits that the introduction and regulation of a claims market might imply both for potential claims sellers and buyers, in order to ultimately assess whether such a solution might actually increase individual’s legal empowerment. Through the damage claims market compensation would be granted more quickly and easily to consumers who had suffered harm: tort victims would, in fact, be compensated instantly upon the sale of their claims without any burden of proof. On the other hand, claim-buyers would profit from the gap between the amount that a consumer would accept for an immediate refund and the compensation awarded in court. In the fourth part of the paper, the analysis will focus on the legal legitimacy of the litigation trolling activity in the US and the EU framework. Even though there is no express provision that forbids the sale of the right to pursue a claim in court - or that deems such a right to be non-transferable – procedural laws of single States (especially in the EU panorama) must be taken into account in evaluating this aspect. The fifth and final part of the paper will summarize the various data collected to suggest an evaluation on if, and through which normative solutions, the litigation trolling might comport benefits for competition and which would be its overall effect over consumer’s protection.

Keywords: competition, claims, consumer's protection, litigation

Procedia PDF Downloads 206

Authors: Abisha Isaac Mohanlal

Abstract:

Amidst all suspicions and cynicism raised by the legal fraternity, Artificial Intelligence has found its way into the legal system and has revolutionized the conventional forms of legal services delivery. Be it legal argumentation and research or resolution of complex legal disputes; artificial intelligence has crept into all legs of modern day legal services. Its impact has been largely felt by way of big data, legal expert systems, prediction tools, e-lawyering, automated mediation, etc., and lawyers around the world are forced to upgrade themselves and their firms to stay in line with the growth of technology in law. Researchers predict that the future of legal services would belong to artificial intelligence and that the age of human lawyers will soon rust. But as far as the Judiciary is concerned, even in the developed countries, the system has not fully drifted away from the orthodoxy of preferring Natural Intelligence over Artificial Intelligence. Since Judicial decision-making involves a lot of unstructured and rather unprecedented situations which have no single correct answer, and looming questions of legal interpretation arise in most of the cases, discretion and Emotional Intelligence play an unavoidable role. Added to that, there are several ethical, moral and policy issues to be confronted before permitting the intrusion of Artificial Intelligence into the judicial system. As of today, the human judge is the unrivalled master of most of the judicial systems around the globe. Yet, scientists of Artificial Intelligence claim that robot judges can replace human judges irrespective of how daunting the complexity of issues is and how sophisticated the cognitive competence required is. They go on to contend that even if the system is too rigid to allow robot judges to substitute human judges in the recent future, Artificial Intelligence may still aid in other judicial tasks such as drafting judicial documents, intelligent document assembly, case retrieval, etc., and also promote overall flexibility, efficiency, and accuracy in the disposal of cases. By deconstructing the major challenges that Artificial Intelligence has to overcome in order to successfully invade the human- dominated judicial sphere, and critically evaluating the potential differences it would make in the system of justice delivery, the author tries to argue that penetration of Artificial Intelligence into the Judiciary could surely be enhancive and reparative, if not fully transformative.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, judicial decision making, judicial systems, legal services delivery

Procedia PDF Downloads 195

Authors: Charles A. Khamala

Abstract:

In 2003, constrained by an absent “rule of law culture” and negative economic growth, the new Kenyan government chose to pursue incremental judicial reforms rather than comprehensive constitutional reforms. President Mwai Kibaki’s first administration’s judicial reform strategy was two pronged. First, to implement unprecedented “radical surgery,” he appointed a new Chief Justice who instrumentally recommended that half the purportedly-corrupt judiciary should be removed by Presidential tribunals of inquiry. Second, the replacement High Court judges, initially, instrumentally-endorsed the “radical surgery’s” administrative decisions removing their corrupt predecessors. Meanwhile, retention of the welfare-reducing Constitution perpetuated declining public confidence in judicial institutions culminating in refusal by the dissatisfied opposition party to petition the disputed 2007 presidential election results, alleging biased and corrupt courts. Fatefully, widespread post-election violence ensued. Consequently, the international community prompted the second Kibaki administration to concede to a new Constitution. Suddenly, the High Court then adopted a non-instrumental interpretation to reject the 2003 “radical surgery.” This paper therefore critically analyzes whether the Kenyan court’s inconsistent interpretations–pertaining to the constitutionality of the 2003 “radical surgery” removing corruption from Kenya’s courts–was predicated on political expediency or human rights principles. If justice “must also seen to be done,” then pursuit of the CJ’s, Judicial Service Commission’s and president’s political or economic interests must be limited by respect for the suspected judges and magistrates’ due process rights. The separation of powers doctrine demands that the dismissed judges should have a right of appeal which entails impartial review by a special independent oversight mechanism. Instead, ignoring fundamental rights, Kenya’s new Supreme Court’s interpretation of another round of vetting under the new 2010 Constitution, ousts the High Court’s judicial review jurisdiction altogether, since removal of judicial corruption is “a constitutional imperative, akin to a national duty upon every judicial officer to pave way for judicial realignment and reformulation.”

Keywords: administrative decisions, corruption, fair hearing, judicial review, (non) instrumental

Procedia PDF Downloads 441

Authors: Felix O. Omosele

Abstract:

Several studies have established that electronic voting machines are prone to multi-faceted challenges. One of which is their capacity to lose votes after the ballots might have been cast. Therefore, the international consensus appears to favour the use of electronic voting machines that are accompanied with verifiable audit paper audit trail (VVPAT). At present, there is no known study that has evaluated the impacts (or otherwise) of this verification and auditing on the authentication, admissibility and evidential weight of electronically-obtained electoral data. This legal inquiry is important as elections are sometimes won or lost in courts and on the basis of such data. This gap will be filled by the present research work. Using the United States of America as a case study, this paper employed a qualitative legal analysis of several of its appellate courts’ judicial opinions. This analysis equally unearths the necessary statutory rules and regulations that are important to the research problem. The objective of the research is to highlight the roles played by VVPAT on electoral evidence- as seen from the eyes of the court. The preliminary outcome of this qualitative analysis shows that the admissibility and weight attached to ‘Computer Evidence from e-voting machines (CEEM)’ are often treated with general standards applied to other computer-stored evidence. These standards sometimes fail to embrace the peculiar challenges faced by CEEM, particularly with respect to their tabulation and transmission. This paper, therefore, argues that CEEM should be accorded unique consideration by courts. It proposes the development of a legal standard which recognises verification and auditing as ‘weight enhancers’ for electronically-obtained electoral data.

Keywords: admissibility of computer evidence, electronic voting, qualitative legal analysis, voting machines in the USA

Procedia PDF Downloads 158