Perbezaan antara semakan "Duluan kehakiman"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
127 bait ditambah ,  14 tahun lalu
 
===Tempat rayuan terakhir===
TheMahkamah Britishtertinggi [[United Kingdom]] iaitu [[House of Lords]] wastidak notperlu boundmengikut tokeputusan followlepasnya itsyang owntersendiri decisionssehingga until the casekes [[London Street Tramways vlwn London County Council]] [1898] AC 375. AfterSelepas thiskes case,ini oncesebarang theperubahan Housepada hadundang-undang givenberkenaan asesuatu rulingperkara onhanya aboleh pointdipinda ofoleh law,Parlimen themelalui matter was closed unless and until Parliament made a change by statutestatut.
 
ThisSituasi situationini changed,berubah however,selepas afterpengeluaran the[[Penyataan issuancePengamalan]] ofpada thetahun [[Practice Statement1966]] of 1966. ItIa enabled themembenarkan House of Lords tomeminda adapt[[undang-undang EnglishInggeris]] lawbersesuaian toperistiwa meet changing social conditionssemasa. InDalam kes R vlwn G & R pada tahun [[2003]], the House of Lords overruledmenolak itskeputusannya decisiondalam inkes Caldwell [[1981]], whichyang hadtelah allowedmembenarkan thedirinya House to establishmendirikan [[mens rea]] ("guiltyminda mindyang bersalah") bydengan measuringmenyukat akelakuan defendant'sseseorang conductdefenden against that of aberbanding "reasonableseorang person,waras" regardlessdengan oftidak themengira defendant'skeadaan actualsebenar stateminda ofdefenden minditu.
 
HoweverWalau bagaimanapun, the Practice Statement has seldomPenyata beenPengamalan appliedamat byjarang thediaplikasi House of Lords, usuallydan onlyhanya asdigunakan asebagai lastpilihan resortterakhir. AsDari oftahun [[2005, the]] House of Lords hasmenolak rejectedkeputusannya itsyang pastterdahulu decisionstidak no morelebih thandaripada 20 times.kali Theykerana arebimbang reluctantpenggunaannya tosecara useberlebihan itakan becausememperkenalkan theyketidakpastian feardalam to introduce uncertainty into the lawundang-undang. InDalam R v Kansal (2002), theumpamanya majoritymajoriti ofahli House membersof took theLords viewberpendapat thatbahawa R v Lambert (akes previous caseterdahulu) haddiputuskan beensecara wronglytidak decided,betul butakan declinedtetapi totidak departmahu frommenolak theirkeputusan earlierterdahulu decisionmereka.
 
===Aplikasi pada sistem perundangan Inggeris===
3,214

suntingan

Menu pandu arah