|
Finality (law)
Finality, in law, is the concept that certain disputes must achieve a resolution from which no further appeal may be taken, and from which no collateral proceedings may be permitted to disturb that resolution. For example, in some jurisdictions, those convicted of a crime may not sue their defence attorney for incompetence or legal malpractice if the civil lawsuit would call into question the finality of the criminal conviction. Finality is considered to be important because otherwise, there would be no certainty as to the meaning of the law, or the outcome of any legal process. The principle is an aspect of the separation of powers, that being a distinction between the executive and the judicial power. That concept was defined in ''Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)'' in which a court stated that unless orders were valid until set aside, "the exercise of judicial power could yield no adjudication of right and liability to which immediate effect could be given". The imp ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Appeal
In law, an appeal is the process in which cases are reviewed by a higher authority, where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction as well as a process of clarifying and interpreting law. Although appellate courts have existed for thousands of years, common law countries did not incorporate an affirmative right to appeal into their jurisprudence until the 19th century. History Appellate courts and other systems of error correction have existed for many millennia. During the first dynasty of Babylon, Hammurabi and his governors served as the highest appellate courts of the land. Ancient Roman law recognized the right to appeal in the Valerian and Porcian laws since 509 BC. Later it employed a complex hierarchy of appellate courts, where some appeals would be heard by the emperor. Additionally, appellate courts have existed in Japan since at least the Kamakura Shogunate (1185–1333 CE). During this time, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legal Malpractice
Legal malpractice is the term for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, or breach of contract by a lawyer during the provision of legal services that causes harm to a client. Examples A common example of legal malpractice involves the lawyer's missing a deadline for filing a paper with the court or serving a paper on another party, where that error is fatal to the client's case or causes the client to spend more money to resolve the case than would otherwise have been required. For example, a lawyer may commit malpractice by: * After being retained to file a claim or lawsuit, failing to file a case before the statute of limitations expires. * Failing to respond to potentially dispositive motions filed by the opposing party. * Failing to timely file a notice of appeal. Malpractice may also occur as the result of a breach of the contract pursuant to which the client is represented by the attorney. United States Under U.S. law, in order to rise to an actionable level of negligence ( ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Lawsuit
- A lawsuit is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used in reference to a civil action brought by a plaintiff (a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions) requests a legal remedy or equitable remedy from a court. The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's complaint. If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is in the plaintiff's favor, and a variety of court orders may be issued to enforce a right, award damages, or impose a temporary or permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be issued to prevent future legal disputes. A lawsuit may involve dispute resolution of private law issues between individuals, business entities or non-profit organizations. A lawsuit may also enable the state to be treated as if it were a private party ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Kable V Director Of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
''Kable v DPP'',. is a decision of the High Court of Australia. It is a significant case in Australian constitutional law. The case is notable for having established the 'Kable Doctrine', a precept in Australian law with relevance to numerous important legal issues; including the separation of powers, parliamentary sovereignty, Australian federalism, and the Judiciary, judicial role. It is particularly significant as one of the few restraints upon the otherwise plenary legislative powers of state parliaments in Australia, aside those imposed by the Commonwealth through Section 109 of the Constitution of Australia, section 109. The ''Kable'' decision is controversial among legal scholars. Facts Gregory Kable had been sentenced to five years imprisonment for the manslaughter of his wife. In gaol, Kable had sent threatening letters to the people who denied him access to his children. He was charged and sentenced to an additional 16 months for writing the letters in 1990. Four yea ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Res Judicata
''Res judicata'' (RJ) or ''res iudicata'', also known as claim preclusion, is the Latin term for "a matter decided" and refers to either of two concepts in both civil law and common law legal systems: a case in which there has been a final judgment and that is no longer subject to appeal; and the legal doctrine meant to bar (or preclude) relitigation of a claim between the same parties. In the case of ''res judicata'', the matter cannot be raised again, either in the same court or in a different court. A court will use ''res judicata'' to deny reconsideration of a matter. The doctrine of ''res judicata'' is a method of preventing injustice to the parties of a case supposedly finished but perhaps also or mostly a way of avoiding unnecessary waste of judicial resources. ''Res judicata'' does not merely prevent future judgments from contradicting earlier ones, but also prevents litigants from multiplying judgments, and confusion. Common law In common law jurisdictions, the prin ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legal Procedure
Procedural law, adjective law, in some jurisdictions referred to as remedial law, or rules of court, comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in civil, lawsuit, criminal or administrative proceedings. The rules are designed to ensure a fair and consistent application of due process (in the U.S.) or fundamental justice (in other common law countries) to all cases that come before a court. Substantive law, which refers to the actual claim and defense whose validity is tested through the procedures of procedural law, is different from procedural law. In the context of procedural law, procedural rights may also refer not exhaustively to rights to information, access to justice, and right to counsel, rights to public participation, right to confront accusers as well as the basic presumption of innocence (meaning the prosecution regularly must meet the burden of proof, though different jurisdictions have various exceptions), with those rights encompa ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Appeal")