Directives and Regulations are forms of secondary EU legislation. Directives are binding and lay down results to be achieved by the Member States. However it is up to each Member State to create or adapt their legislations to meet the requirements by the specified date in the Directive. Regulations are binding legislative Acts which are directly enforceable in all Member States and are applied in full. The Regulation will specify a date in which it will be enforced (The Open University (OU), 2017a, 2.2).
There are a few differences between Directives and Regulations. Directives can be seen as an order listing objectives while Regulations are rules. Furthermore, Directives are addressed to national authorities who must then take …show more content…
• Paragraph 1 – U6 – 7.1/U10 – 3.2
- Definition of courts of first instance and examples.
- Magistrates Courts/Judges
• Paragraph 2 – U10 – 2.3
- County Courts
• Paragraph 3 – U6 – 7.1
- Appellate Courts
- Supreme Court
• Paragraph 4 –U10 – 3.3
- Crown Courts
- Appeals from Magistrates Courts
• Paragraph 5 – U10 – 2.5
- High Courts/Three Divisions
• Paragraph 6 - U10 – 6/3.4
- The Court of Appeals/Two Divisions
• Paragraph 7–U10-4
- Supreme Court
- Overlapping classifications
The justice system exists to uphold the rule of law, to provide equal protection for citizens, a place to resolve disputes and to enforce laws. The courts have three classifications, criminal and civil, inferior and superior, courts of first instance and appellate courts. These classifications overlap when differentiating courts.
The phrase courts of first instance refers to the courts where legal proceedings are first heard. For example, Magistrate Courts, County Courts, The Crown Courts and the High Courts. Different types of cases will be heard in different courts. For example all criminal proceedings will be first heard in the Magistrate Courts but if the case is more serious it will be sent to the Crown Court. (OU, 2017c, 7.1). The Magistrate Courts may also deal with certain civil proceedings such as granting licenses. Cases in the Magistrate Courts are heard by a
There are three components for the criminal justice system is the police, the courts and then corrections. The police enforce the law by apprehending offenders, investigating crimes and also trying to prevent crimes among other things. The courts conduct fair and impartial trials; they determine criminal cases and decide if an offender is guilty or innocent along with many other things. Corrections carry out sentences that have been decided by the courts, they protect the public, and they rehabilitate; reform and reintegrate convicted offenders back into society (2011 CJi Interactive)..
The criminal justice system has been proven to play a very important role in society. The criminal justice system is used to keep the citizens in check and to make sure that the laws that are made are being followed. It also is there to penalize anyone who disobeys the laws. In the criminal justice system, there are 3 main parts, law enforcement, adjudication, and corrections. Law enforcement is self-explainable. It consists of the law enforcers such as police officers and sheriffs. Adjudication is made up of people in the court house such as judges and lawyers. Corrections is made up of jailhouse matters such as prison officials. In these many components of the criminal justice system, there are all put in place to help correct people to do the right thing. There are punitive efforts and rehabilitative efforts. At time, the system may lean towards one category or more, which can be dangerous in terms of disciplinary action. The criminal justice system is more punitive than rehabilitative which makes the system ineffective.
A court is a way for society to formally punish wrongdoers or criminals and make decisions. Courts determine behaviors based on society beliefs on what is acceptable behavior and which behavior is not and deserves punishment. Courts also decide on what is fair, just, punishment, how long to enforce a punishment, and innocents. Courts interrupt laws that can have impact on citizens, businesses, private parties, government officials, and many more. The purpose of the court is to upholding the law, protecting individuals, resolving disputes and reinforcing social norms. There are three elements to be considered a court in America. The first is the court must have the proper legal authority to be a court. This is given by constitutions or statues that have been created. The second is courts are found in the judicial branch. There are some exceptions to this but for the most part all courts will fall under the judicial branch. The third is when a court makes a
Our Justice system is made up of these three main components; Law Enforcement, Courts, and Corrections. These components are what helps our Justice system run smoothly and fairly. Our law enforcement officers help keep the peace and citizens safe. The Courts are ran by judges who help to sentence offenders and oversee trials. Finally, Corrections is a component in
The U.S. criminal justice system is made up of different but equally important divisions to ensure proper criminal justice functions are performed. This system is broken up into three different segments: law enforcement, the courts, and corrections These segments work together to enforce justice to all when a crime has been committed (Schmalleger, 2013).
In general, a regulation is a rule employed in controlling, directing, or managing an activity, organization, and/or system. However, in relating to law, a regulation is a specific rule that is enforced by a regulatory agency. This is also known as administrative regulations. These regulations are created and passed to enforce statutory laws and policies. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is an agency that administers federal health and welfare programs and activities. This agency created and enforces specific regulations for the Medicaid and Medicare programs. Although, there are many other policy issues and topics that this agency has established regulations
The United States criminal justice system has three main components: law enforcement, courts (both civil and criminal) and corrections. The law enforcement component is made up of agencies whose task it is to prevent, detect and investigate crimes. The job of the courts is to hear cases and decide whether the defendant is guilty or innocent and to give out proper punishments. The corrections system (or penal system) refers to agencies such as prisons and probation that enforce the courts punishments.
A rule is a principle to which someone would conform to inside an organisation. They ensure that operations run in a smooth manner. A regulation is written in law and put into effect by authority. They are needed by organisations for them to operate efficiently. They ensure people are treated with respect and without bias, and all procedures and standards are consistent, and that orders are followed.
The judiciary system is defined by Article III in the Constitution and Section 2 describes the powers and limitations that court system has. The purpose of the judiciary is to handle interpretations of the laws created by the constitution and any disputes that arises between parties, cases may be brought to the court, the court cannot create cases. There are 3 levels in the court system, which is true for the state judiciary as well as the Federal level. The two lower levels attempt resolve issues while lessoning the burden on the supreme courts. The lowest level of court is the district court aka trial courts,
“The judicial system of the United States is unique in so far as it is actually made up of two different court systems, the Federal Court System and the State Court System”. ( United States Courts).
Another key question is why do we have regulation? Regulation is meant to serve the best interest of the public. Regulation can serve the private interest, public interest or both. Almost every aspect of our daily life is regulated (as per Regulation: A Primer, page 1). Regulation is very comprehensive to the point that it extends to the moment we wake up to the moment we go back to bed at night. In the morning, there are regulations that dictate which airwaves are used by your radio station; in addition, food and drug agencies regulate the content of your toothpaste, soap,
The main difference between principle based and rule based regulation is the level of detailed instruction involved. Rule based is a strict manner in how a body should behave, whereas principle based regulation, is a guideline, leaving the body with some freedom on how they comply with it. This distinction may not be clearly defined. While in theory, the difference between both systems may be clear cut, in practice, they may overlap, or a system may have to adopt a mixture of both rule based and principle based regulation, “Rules may become more principle-like through the addition of qualifications and exceptions, whereas principles may become more rule-like by the addition of best practices and requirements”.
The CJEU case-law on horizontal direct effect of directives arguably lacks consistency in regards to the application of the general principle. The principle of direct effect was established in Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen. Although there is no set definition of direct effect, a broader definition was provided in Van Gend en Loos that it “can be expressed as the capacity of a provision of EU law to be invoked before a national court.” However, Van Dyun v. Home Office established that directives are capable of direct effect. Furthermore, Marshall v. Southampton established that there could only be vertical direct effect of directives. This stringent principle has arguable ignited the highly contested debate of whether or not horizontal direct effect is applicable to directives or if directives could only have vertical direct effect. However, this essay shall explore the lack of consistency in case-law regarding horizontal direct effect of directives. Firstly, this paper will delve into the case-law of the topic of horizontal direct effect of directives in efforts to try to highlight its consistency in its approach. Secondly, the paper will use case law and the opinion of academics (enter the name of the academics later) to highlight its inconsistencies using the legal mechanisms that have been introduced by the Courts to try to compensate for the lack of horizontal direct effect of directives. Namely, indirect effect, incidental horizontal