Common misconceptions

person invading or challenging another person’s freedom maybe killed in an act of defense. He then compared this situation with killing wild beasts when they possess threat to a person, because the oppressor or attacker “are not under the ties of the common law of reason” and so they “may be treated as beasts of prey.” The attacker will certainly kill the person if fallen under his power. Locke then continues to explain his claim that killing someone who possesses threat to one’s freedom is justified

A question that is commonly asked when receiving a virus is, what is the fastest way to get rid of it? No human enjoys the presence of a common cold, despite more extreme terms such as the flu. Rest and fluids are typically the first reaction to curing a common cold. Then, medicine that is categorized toward the symptoms is received. Although, how do you speed up the process? Many think that the intake of large doses of vitamin c can speed up or potentially get rid of the cold all together. Vitamin

Judicial precedent is one of the unwritten law in Malaysia. The sources of law not only come from legislation but also from the cases decided by the courts. The courts in this context refer to the superior court in Malaysia, which are the Court Of Appeal, the Federal Court, High Court of Malaya and the High Court of Sabah & Sarawak. Judicial precedent also knows as case law, judicial decision or the stare decisis. The term ‘judicial’ refers to anything about the court while the term ‘precedent’

Primary Source Analysis: The Act of Supremacy 1534 The primary source I chose to research is The Act of Supremacy (1534). This was an act passed by the English Parliament establishing the English monarch, which at the time was Henry Tudor VIII, as the head of state and religious head of the Church of England. Although there is always some glamorization in the writing and depiction of historically based movies, I enjoyed both “The Other Boleyn Girl” and the cable series “The Tudors”. I found

The Canadian criminal law involves the prosecution by the government of a person for an act that has been categorized as a crime. In order to convict, an individual or party they must have demonstrated or committed a guilty act, whilst having a guilty state of mind or intentions. In other words, the individual must represent “actus reus, an evil act, and must simultaneously possess mens rea, an evil mind. It is essential that the prosecution prove both of these elements of the offence to the satisfaction

For the purposes of this paper, I will be comparing the Federal Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and the 2017 Minnesota Statute - Chapter 336 Uniform Commercial Code. The focus will of this paper will mainly cover UCC Article 2 – Sales and UCC Article 2A – Leases. Additionally, this paper will explore specifically how the term “unconscionability” is defined and addressed in regards to UCC contract law. At first glance it is evidently apparent that the that Minnesota UCC Code is based on the Federal

The Jury System in Western Australia Trial by jury throughout Australia, originates from the British judicial system. Britain’s control of many colonies, including Australia, during the period of the British Empire, was influential in forming a judicial system in the colonies, based on its own. Trial by jury is an important and integral part of the legal system. Many of our legal traditions, such as the number of members of a jury being twelve, originated from Britain. The jury is an important

1. What is an option contract? An option contract allows the option holder the right to purchase something within in a certain time period for a particular price from the seller. 2. What is an “escrow?” The escrow is an account managed by a trusted third party, it can be used to handle money, property, or a deed; until such time the payment comes due. 3. How did the escrow work in this case? The bank would keep Brodsky’s check for 60 days without cashing it, until he decided if he wanted the property

In this case study, I will explore the concept of stare decisis and wherether it is in exorable command. I will be explaining what the court means when it say that” stare decisis is not an inexorable command”. Also what it would mean for the American system of criminal justice, if stare decisis actually was “inexorable command”. Stare Decisis is not an Inexorable Command It's referring to precedents. Precedents are previous decisions of the court that need to be followed by courts in the same

Leipold’s view is that we should not endorse or support the use of jury nullification because it requires too much critical thought without appropriate evidence or mental training on the part of the jury. I disagree that the jury would be unable to adequately decide whether or not an individual on trial would be harmful if released back into the general population. On the contrary, it seems that they who are closest to the issue would be best able to decide if the individual would be harmful or