Law514 Commercial Law Assignment. Introduction: This purpose of this essay is to evaluate the statement that “Judges (courts) do not ‘make’ law but merely interpret the law.” This statement is partial correct partial wrong as in practice the higher court is eligible to make and change the law while the lower court only has the power to interperate and follow the law made the higher court. The idea behind this as higher court are more superior and competent they can make and review the judgment of
According to the Australian Constitution, the power to make laws vested in the parliament , whilst the power to interpret laws and to judge whether they apply in individual cases, vested in the High Court and other federal courts. In fact, one of the major function of the high court is to interpret the Constitution. For instance, the High Court of Australia may rule a law to be unconstitutional, that is beyond the power of parliament to make, and therefore of no effect. Such a circumstance would
Through interpreting the given powers of the Constitution, Jay declined the request to issue an opinion by means of expounding on the separation of powers: “Being in certain respects checks upon each other, and our being judges of a court in the last resort, are considerations which afford strong arguments against the propriety of our extrajudicially deciding the questions alluded to.” It was in Jay’s declination that the judiciary’s independence was first established.
INTRODUCTION: Parliament, the supreme law-making body, has an 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
THE PATH OF THE LAW- BY OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, JR. ‘The Path of the Law’, originally put forth in the form of a speech, was presented by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in the year 1897. He is considered as one of the forerunners of American Legal Realism. In The Path of the Law, broadly speaking, Holmes speaks about the Prediction Theory of law, the Bad Man Account of the law, and his criticism of Legal Formalism. In this paper, the reader will find arguments either for or against these theories. Holmes
4. Administrative tribunals and decision from other common law countries Beside the judicial functions of courts, administrative tribunals are another official bodies that adhere the rights to settle the disputes, and they are established within federal and state jurisdictions. The well-established practice of the doctrine of precedent is also found in the operation of administrative tribunals, where the inferior tribunals follow decisions of superior but those decisions are not necessary carry
COURSE: Law RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW AND JOURNALISM The establishment of justice does not mean merely the establishment of courts or the machinery for the enforcement of law. It means something far more. It means the establishment of just relations between man and man, between man and his own government, between man, the individual and society. It means the creation of a social state that deals justly with every man and every interest of man. This may not be done by the profession of law alone.
#78, Alexander Hamilton discusses the importance of having a judiciary branch and the power of judicial review. An important consideration throughout the decision of having judiciary review was appointing the judges and deciding on the tenure in office. There was high concern about these judges being unelected and serving for life. People thought this would lead to them being more corrupt and less likely to base their decisions around what the people really want and need. There would not be a huge
Constitution. If judges were to make law then they would be contradicting this doctrine. The legislative supremacy disqualifies the courts power to review the validity of legislation, refer to British Railway Board v Pickin . The objective of judges is to not make law but simply declare what the law had always been. Acts of Parliament are the highest form of authority and the courts hands are tied by it. But through the doctrine of precedent, the judicial function of declaring and applying the law has a ‘quasi-legislative
in the common law systems. It states that judges are to follow the court's previous decisions when deciding cases with the same facts. It is simply an ideal of “deciding similar cases in a similar manner”1 so that consistency is maintained when deciding cases. There are a number of advantages and disadvantages in common law systems where judges make the law. In fact, the question of whether judges in common law systems make the law is controversial and debatable. Different judges have different