Court Rulings Research Articles

Court rules against former employee

Case name: Jackson v. The Regents of the University of California, No. G060491 (Cal. Ct. App. 12/27/23).

Divided court rules in favor of student‐athlete

Case name: Thomas v. Regents of the University of California, et al., No. A164550 (Cal. Ct. App. 11/29/23).

JUDICIAL REVIEW: EXPLORING THE ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATIONS

This research paper offers a thorough analysis of the Indian Constitution's judicial review system. The study examines the historical development, scope, and constraints of judicial review in India through a thorough examination of key constitutional clauses, significant court rulings, and academic commentary. It assesses the judiciary's contribution to maintaining fundamental rights, guaranteeing the separation of powers, and defending constitutional ideals critically. The purpose of the study is to shed light on the special characteristics and difficulties of judicial review within the Indian constitutional framework by drawing comparisons with judicial review systems in other jurisdictions.

The phenomenon of stigmatization in the real estate market

Motivation: The following article covers the entire path of stigmatization, from that which directly affects a person to special cases of real estate stigmatization. Market participants have created many types of stigmatization that discredit a property. These range from the more abstract ones (e.g., paranormal phenomena taking place on a property or superstition) to the more serious ones (e.g., a restricted use area). The following article focuses on properties located in restricted use areas and the impact of this factor on property values. It analyzes court rulings by Polish courts on compensation in connection with the decrease in the value of real estate due to the establishment of a restricted use area.Aim: The main goal of the article is to identify the phenomenon of stigmatization in the real estate market, while the specific goal is to identify the phenomenon of stigmatization of real estate in restricted use areas around airports.Results: One of the main reasons why stigmatization occurs in the real estate market is ignorance and people’s fear of what they don’t know. The most common objects of stigmatization are restricted use areas around airports. However, in the court rulings described in the article, there is no consensus on whether stigmatization of real estate in itself affects the value of real estate.

THE DEATH PENALTY AND ETHICS

The execution of a person who has been found guilty of a crime by the state is known as the capital penalty. The usefulness of this punishment is hotly contested in today's culture. The moral perspective of abolitionists holds that the death sentence is unethical because it violates human rights and can lead to biased sentencing. The "eye-to-eye approach" and the "deterrent theory" are the main arguments used by proponents of the death penalty to support their position. However, some Indian court rulings have emphasized the "rarest of the rare" situations for which this type of punishment ought to be applied.

2023년 민사소송법 중요 판례 평석

This paper examines key civil procedure and execution law rulings issued by the Supreme Court in 2023. We analyze seven significant civil procedure precedents, focusing on: 1. Exclusive international jurisdiction agreements, 2. Ratification of objections and compulsory mediation, 3. Lease contract requirements and enforcement, 4. Protection by provisional seizure: Non-existence and cessation of prescription, 5. Causal relationship and burden of proof in medical malpractice, 6. Reconciliation replacement and res judicata in claim objection lawsuits, 7. Preservation of public property and cancellation registration lawsuits. Each precedent is categorized, summarized by facts, rulings of lower courts and the Supreme Court, with analysis of relevant law and the author's perspective. While some rulings involve international private law, civil law, or commercial law aspects, these are addressed only if relevant to civil procedure. The paper also briefly reviews four major rulings on civil execution law: 1. Indirect coercion, incidental obligations, and claim objection, 2. Execution claim seizure after full order service and its effect, 3. Public notice procedure violation and auction effect, 4. Distribution objection and lawsuit succession. Additionally, a section on “Other Civil Procedure Act Precedents” highlights notable rulings due to space constraints. While not exhaustive, this analysis aims to be a valuable resource for future civil procedure research.

2023년 형사소송법 중요 판례 평석

In 2023, there were numerous Supreme Court rulings in the field of criminal procedure law. Among them, eleven important judgments with substantial meanings related to criminal practice, theory, and guarantee of basic rights of the people were selected to introduce the issues and to give a brief review. The main judgments introduced in the paper include the following; ① A ruling that determined that it was illegal to newly search and print a copy of the imaging created during the seizure and search of electronic information in the preceding case for the purpose of investigating criminal charges against an accomplice after the judgment in the preceding case was already confirmed, ② A ruling against the need to recognize the right of the principal offender to participate in the case where a person concealing evidence arbitrarily submits the information storage medium after being incited to conceal it by the person in question, ③ A ruling that in cases of an offence unpunishable over objection, an adult guardian cannot decide not to seek punishment on behalf of a victim who is incompetent, ④ A ruling acknowledging the admissibility of video footage taken without a warrant by an investigative agency at the scene of a crime during or immediately after the crime, ⑤ The Supreme Court ruling that Article 60-6, Paragraph 1 of the Military Criminal Act applies to assaults between Korean soldiers and others that occurred at U.S. military bases in Korea (excluding the application of impunity against will), ⑥ A ruling that determines the degree of reliability of the suspect's statement at the investigation stage as a condition for acknowledging the evidentiary capacity of the investigator's testimony, ⑦ A ruling that acknowledged the admissibility of a phone call recording between the defendant and an individual, which was secretly recorded by the individual, ⑧ Judgment that determines the meaning of ‘when the contents are acknowledged’ in Article 312, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act and the requirements for the admissibility of evidence of the defendant’s accomplice written by the prosecutor, ⑨ A ruling that a decision must be made explicitly on whether to grant permission for a prosecutor's request to change the indictment, ⑩ A ruling that set strict sentencing conditions for the original trial verdict that sentenced the death penalty, ⑪ Judgment explaining the scope of adjudication of the supreme court and the remand trial on the main and reserve indictments, ⑫ Judgments explaining the requirements for trial without attendance at the appellate trial and the requirements for public notice, ⑬ A ruling that explains the scope of the effect of a final judgment on some of the concurrent offences.
 Through active criticism of the above rulings and discussions, many developments are expected in the field of criminal procedure law case and theory this year.

헌법재판소 결정에 대한 정량적 분석에 관한 시론적 연구

This paper aims to analyze the argumentative structure of proportionality in the Constitutional Court's decisions regarding laws restricting the venue of assemblies from the perspective of the quantity. Specifically, this paper focuses on the minimal impairment and balancing by establishing seven indicators. The seven indicators are broadly composed of three indicators related to the minimal harm of infringement, three indicators related to the balance of legal interests, and one indicator related to the intensity of scrutiny. The Constitutional Court changed their position from constitutional to unconstitutional upon adjudicating the prohibition of assemblies near the National Assembly Building in the Decision 2018Hun-Ba322 on May 31, 2018. Therefore, the analysis of this decision takes precedence. Subsequently, the analysis proceeds to the recent decisions such as the 2018Hun-Ba48 on December 22, 2022, regarding the prohibition of assemblies near the presidential residence and the 2019Hun-Ma1417 on September 26, 2023, regarding the prohibition of assemblies in front of Incheon City Hall. From the perspective of the quantity of arguments, an analysis of the argumentative structure of these three decisions reveals that the distinctions between minimal impairment and balancing has become clearer, as well as an enhanced recognition and argumentation regarding the intensity of judicial review. Consistent argumentative structures concerning minimal impairment and balancing enhance the persuasiveness of the decisions, lead to more appropriate conclusions, and prevent arbitrary decisions, highlighting their significant importance. Furthermore, the intensity of judicial review has distinguished significance in Constitutional Court rulings as it is a matter of the principle of separation of powers regarding the extent to which the discretion of the legislative branch should be respected. Especially in cases regarding legal provisions that restrict essential freedoms for maintaining democracy, such as the freedom of assembly, the necessity for clearly articulating the intensity of scrutiny is even greater. The rules of argumentation that must be followed to reach any conclusion, whether constitutional or unconstitutional, should be consistently upheld.

2023년 민법(물권법 및 채권법) 중요 판례 평석

In this paper, among the major precedents of the Supreme Court on civil matters in the year of 2023, I analyzed the meaning and contents of 7 important decisions (focused on the law of real rights and claims). The Supreme Court explicitly ruled for the first time that in the so-called ‘mutual deprivation of the possession of his/her property,’ the claim for recovery of possession by the preceding encroacher could not be allowed. The Supreme Court repeatedly has held that claims by road site owners to local governments for land handover, road demolition, and traffic closures are, in principle, an abuse of rights. With respect to the claims of unjust enrichment, the Supreme Court also repeatedly states the legal principles of abandoning the exclusive right to use and profit. Although the legal principle is controversial in academia, in practice, it is firmly established as a useful legal principle in determining whether a claim for return of unjust enrichment is accept or not between the road site owners and the local governments. The Supreme Court explicitly ruled for the first time that a third party who acquired ownership after the unauthorized rental act by a person having a right of retention can also exercise the right to demand the extinction of the right of retention. In the past three years, there have been three Supreme Court rulings, including the target judgment in 2023, on issues that have been mainly disputed in academic fields regarding the right to demand the extinction of the right of retention, and it seems that many of the major issues regarding the right to demand the extinction of the right of retention have been settled through precedents. For the second time since 2017, the Supreme Court applied the ‘high probability theory with respect to obligee’s right of revocation’ to determine whether a claim based on continuous product supply contract arising after a fraudulent transfer is a claim protected by the law of revocation of the fraudulent transfer.

‘행정소송규칙’에 관한 현황 및 법적 과제

The Administrative Litigation Rules were established based on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court. Originating from England and America, the rule-making authority of the Supreme Court aims to ensure the independence and expertise of the judiciary branch. In Korea, the Supreme Court is granted broad discretion to establish rules regarding litigation procedures, internal regulations, and administrative procedures under the Constitution, even without the basis of law. However, Article 108 of the Constitution contrasts with Anglo-American systems in that the Article recognizes the supremacy of law over conflicting statutory and Supreme Court Rules, thereby affirming the principle of legal superiority. The Administrative Litigation Act has prompted demands for reform from academia, as it has long been left as is since its comprehensive revision in 1984. Now that the Administrative Litigation Rules have been established, such demands are expected to be met to a significant extent. It is noteworthy that the rules reflect significant aspects of past judicial precedents and legal principles adopted by the Supreme Court with regard to interpreting provisions of the Administrative Litigation Act, or common practices implemented without legal basis. However, uniformly regulating substantive legal interpretations based on Supreme Court Rules may contradict the purpose of Article 108 of the Constitution. Moreover, even for matters concerning litigation procedures, it is more preferable to regulate essential issues on realizing citizens' fundamental rights directly by law. In Korea, the process of establishing Supreme Court Rules is devoid of involvement from the National Assembly, and the sole procedural controls are inquiries of opinions from relevant agencies and prior announcements of legislation. Relying solely on such procedures, however, is limited in securing democratic legitimacy. Because judicial reviews for unlawful Supreme Court Rules are carried out by the same body responsible for the establishment, concerns arise over the effectiveness of judiciary controls. Therefore, supplementary legal measures thereof are called for, as well as proactive efforts for the revision of the Administrative Litigation Act.

Clinician perspectives on policy approaches to genetic risk disclosure in families

Genomic sequencing has emerged as a powerful tool with significant implications for patients and their relatives, however, empirical evidence suggests that effective dissemination of risk information within families remains a challenge. Policy responses to address this issue vary across countries, with Belgium notably lacking specific regulations governing nondisclosure of genetic risk. In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians from Belgian clinical genetics centers to gain insight into their perspectives on policy approaches to the disclosure of genetic risk within families. Using real-world examples of legislation and court rulings from France, Australia, and the UK, we explored clinician viewpoints on the roles and responsibilities of both patients and clinicians in the family communication process. Clinicians expressed confusion regarding what was legally permissible regarding contacting at-risk relatives. While there was a consensus among participants that patients have a responsibility to inform their at-risk relatives, participants were hesitant to support the legal enforcement of this duty. Clinicians mostly recognized some responsibility to at-risk relatives, but the extent of this responsibility was a subject of division. Our findings highlight the need for a comprehensive policy that clarifies the roles and responsibilities of clinicians and patients to inform at-risk relatives. Furthermore, the study underscores the practical challenges clinicians face in supporting patients through the complex process of family communication, suggesting a need for additional resources and the exploration of alternative approaches to communication.

Court rules against former college intern

Case name: Griffin v. Secretary of Defense, No. 23‐3220 (6th Cir. 12/05/23).

Is Nigeria Ready to Combat Environmental Problems? A Peep through Judicial Decisions of Nigerian Courts

Nigeria, similar to numerous other nations across the globe, grapples with a multitude of environmental difficulties. The imperative of safeguarding the environment is considered inviolable, and any responsible nation must accord it utmost importance. The recognition and correlation between the right to address environmental issues and the rights to life and human dignity, as stated in the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, have been established by authoritative entities inside the country. In Nigeria, there exist a limited number of established authorities responsible for environmental preservation. The main objective of this study is to assess the progress made by Nigeria in the realm of environmental preservation, while also evaluating the extent to which the Nigerian government and other pertinent actors in the environmental sector adhere to court directives pertaining to environmental protection. When a court of appropriate jurisdiction issues a judgement in a specific case, it is expected that the judgement will be promptly adhered to in order to uphold the principles of the legal system. Failure to comply with court judgements poses a significant issue that requires rapid attention. This study investigates the aforementioned element in the context of evaluations pertaining to environmental conservation. In order for Nigeria to align with international standards pertaining to environmental conservation, it is imperative to adhere to the principles of the rule of law and ensure compliance with court rulings.

ANALYSIS OF SUPREME COURT DECISION NO.556/Pdt.G/2022

<p>This study examines a breach of contract case involving PT. Hasana Damai Putra and Gregorius Harison S, focusing on the court's role in delivering justice and resolving disputes. The case centers on the defendant's failure to fulfill obligations outlined in a property purchase agreement, resulting in financial losses for the plaintiff. The verdict by the Bekasi District Court deemed the defendant's actions as constituting breach of contract, annulling the agreement and ordering compensation for the plaintiff's damages. Using qualitative normative legal research, this analysis explores factors influencing judicial decisions, including factual assessments, legal interpretations, moral considerations, and social contexts. The court's decision, grounded in plaintiff-provided evidence and meticulous legal analysis, underscores its commitment to upholding contractual obligations and ensuring fairness in legal proceedings. Moreover, it highlights the judiciary's role in protecting individual rights and fostering societal stability. This study underscores the importance of court rulings in providing legal clarity, safeguarding rights, and bolstering public confidence in the legal system. By adhering to principles of justice and applicable laws, court decisions serve as vital tools in resolving disputes, fostering social cohesion, and upholding the rule of law. Therefore, this case serves as a poignant illustration of the judiciary's pivotal role in dispensing justice and maintaining legal order within society.</p><p>Keywords:<br />Breach of contract, Judicial decision-making, Legal analysis, Dispute resolution,Court verdict, Contractual obligations</p>

Requirements for court rulings in the light of guarantees of the right to a fair trial

The subject of the study. The legislator does not establish a list of requirements that the rulings of the court of first instance must meet. The article analyzes the requirements for the rulings of the court of first instance in civil proceedings, in comparison with the requirements for court decisions based on domestic procedural legislation and scientific literature. The purpose of the article is to confirm that the main requirements for court rulings are legality, validity, motivation, and enforceability.The research methodology includes the formal-logical method, analysis, synthesis, logicallegal method.Main results. An analysis of domestic legislation and scientific literature led to the conclusion that, based on the requirements that court rulings must meet, the legislator has not correctly defined a list of definitions that must be substantiated, motivated and subject to appeal separately from the final judicial act. The category of protocol definitions should be rather exclusive. Such determinations must be made if it is not required to state the motives for the decision and if it does not affect the essence of the final judicial act.Conclusions. Court rulings must meet the above requirements by analogy with court decisions. The issues raised in this article have not only theoretical, but also practical meaning in relation to civil procedural law in the Russian Federation. The practical problem is that at the moment the legislator has not correctly defined the list of definitions that must be substantiated, motivated and subject to appeal separately from the final judicial act. Court rulings in civil proceedings subject to appeal must meet the requirements of legality, validity, motivation, and enforceability. Contrary to this, in practice the opposite situation often occurs. The category of protocol definitions should be rather exclusive. Such determinations must be made if it is not required to state the motives for the decision and if it does not affect the essence of the final judicial act. Otherwise, this will lead to a violation of the fundamental right to a fair trial and a restriction of a person's access to justice.

Do the Effects of Unpopular Supreme Court Rulings Linger? The Dobbs Decision Rescinding Abortion Rights

New evidence suggests that the world recently changed for the U.S. Supreme Court owing to its decision to abrogate the abortion rights first announced in Roe v. Wade. In contrast to the conventional wisdom that Court support is little undermined by unpopular rulings, the Dobbs decision generated a substantial knock on the Court’s legitimacy. Two crucial frailties limit these findings, however. First, no one has determined whether the lost legitimacy has persisted, since earlier research relied on a one-shot survey conducted shortly after the decision. Second, no analysis has addressed the “values-based regeneration” hypothesis—that support reemerges not long after a legitimacy hit is inflicted. Based on a nationally representative 2023 survey, my analysis finds that the lost legitimacy has lingered, but institutional support may be being rebuilt owing to its close connection with democratic values. Overall, I conclude that understanding persistence is more complicated than many may have assumed.

The Institution of Special Court Rulings in Civil Procedure: Problems of Application

The institution of a special court ruling is one of the procedural tools that ensures that courts of general jurisdiction, when considering cases in civil proceedings, strengthen the rule of law and prevent offenses. Special court rulings have a long history of development: they have gone from a mandatory form of procedural reaction of the court to detected violations of the rule of law or the rules of the socialist community to a response measure of the court to cases of violations of the rule of law attributed to its discretionary powers. At the same time, with the adoption of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the importance and effectiveness of the institution of a special court ruling have significantly decreased. Judicial statistics indicate that there is a long-term and gradually developing trend towards a decrease in the number of private rulings issued by courts of general jurisdiction in civil cases. This situation is caused by fragmented and incomplete legal regulation, its ambiguous interpretation, diversely developing judicial practice and the lack of clarification of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the practice of applying the institute of a special court ruling. In addition, the procedure for monitoring the enforcement of special court rulings by authorized persons in terms of informing them to the court about the measures taken to eliminate and prevent further violations of the rule of law goes beyond the function of the court to administer justice and imposes on the court the duties inherent in control (supervisory) bodies. The above circumstances raise questions about the necessity and expediency of having the institution of special court rulings in civil proceedings in its current form, as well as about the prospects for its further improvement.

THE USE OF JURISPRUDENCE IN INDONESIAN LAW COURT AS A CIVIL LAW COUNTRY

<p>Jurisprudence refers to the decisions made by earlier judges regarding cases that are not covered by the law and which serve as a model for later judges when deciding cases of a like nature. The Supreme Court is an entity with judicial authority in Indonesia and has the authority to publish rulings. As a civil law country, Indonesian law courts do not use jurisprudence as a main legal source. Court judgments under this system are predicated on pertinent laws and regulations, such as the 1945 Constitution, MPR Decrees, Laws, Government Regulations, Presidential Decrees, Supreme Court, Ministerial Decrees, and others. This means that the judge's judgement, which is based on the facts or the available evidence, has some latitude. On the contrary, some countries use common law as their legal system. This legal system favours customary law, which changes over time in accordance with societal changes. In order to ensure that the law is always consistent with a feeling of justice and advantages that are felt immediately by the community, it was established via a judicial institution with a jurisprudence system that is regarded to be superior. Although the Indonesian legal system does not operate on a precedent system, general court judges or judges in lower-level courts are nonetheless required to take the Supreme Court's rulings seriously. This paper will be written as a discussion of how Indonesian law court as a civil law country utilises the jurisprudence, which is the product of common law system, even when it is not commonly used. This paper will also be written to elaborate the comparison between the use of jurisprudence in civil law countries such as Indonesia, and the origin countries that are using the common law system.</p><p>Keywords: Jurisprudence, Indonesian Law Court, Civil Law Country</p>

Przepadek zwierzęcia w świetle orzecznictwa sądowego – analiza przypadku i postulaty de lege ferenda w celu podniesienia ochrony prawnej zwierząt

The article aims to present the functioning of the institution of animal forfeiture under the Act of August 21, 1997 on animal protection. It is a repressive-preventive institution, which is closely related to the property rights of every citizen under the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. At the beginning of the considerations, an attempt was made to define the concept of “animal forfeiture” and to indicate the legal basis for ruling on this legal measure. The types of animal forfeiture occurring under the Act are presented and the circumstances determining their ruling identified. The analysis is extended to include the presentation of cases of application of this institution taken from court rulings and supported by statistical data regarding their adjudication. An interesting aspect of the article is the presentation of resolutions of City Councils, which were declared invalid by the Provincial Administrative Court to the extent that they were inconsistent with the Animal Protection Act. Extensive legal considerations, reinforced by case law and analysis of statistics, have made it possible to present de lege ferenda postulates with regard to raising the level of protection of animal rights. One of the proposals is to combine the institution of forfeiture with a total ban on animal ownership, as well as to articulate in the law the justification for ordering the forfeiture of an animal’s carcass. The article is an attempt to present legal solutions that will enhance the legal protection of animals. As shown in the article, this measure is used relatively rarely. Statistics show that it was applied in only 21.5% of the cases analyzed. Such results may raise legitimate doubts, since most animals against which crimes have been committed are still under the care of their perpetrators, which should undoubtedly change.

The Scope of Pre-Trial Post Constitutional Court Ruling

The research aims to analyze the scope of the Pretrial Decision post-decision of the Constitutional Court and the legal considerations of pretrial judges’ post-decision of the Constitutional Court. This research is a normative legal research using the legislative, conceptual, and case approaches. The research found that first, the scope of the Pretrial Decision post-decision of the Constitutional Court has been expanded regarding the "determination of suspects post-decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 21/PUU-XII/2014", "limitation of the material legal scope of pretrial post-decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 109/PUU-XIII/2015", "expiration of pretrial petition post-decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 102/PUU-XIII/2015", and "submission of SPDP post-decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 130/PUU-XIII/2015". Second, some legal considerations by the District Court judges who examine, adjudicate, and decide on pretrial petitions post-decision of the Constitutional Court still vary in perspectives and their application to the submission of pretrial petitions post-decision of the Constitutional Court. Among them can be found from the legal considerations by the Judge in Decision Number: 3/Pid.Pra/2023/PN.Pya, Decision Number: 2/Pid.Pra/2023/PN.Sbw, Decision Number: 5/Pid.Pra/2023/PN.Mlg, and Decision Number: 2/Pid.Pra/2024/PN Jkt.Sel.