- Published on
Legal Terms - critical legal studies (CLS)
a novel method of jurisprudence that emerged in the United States throughout the 1970s. Though it draws on politics, economics, linguistics, psychoanalysis, philosophy, literary criticism, and semiotics, it offers a generally Marxist critique of the core ideas of the law. Early on, CLS stood out for two reasons: first, it was based in legal study as opposed to sociology or political science; and second, it attempted to rectify the injustices inherent in legal doctrine. Though it is frequently referred to as the continuation of *legal realism, its interpretation of the idea that the law is unpredictable is actually far more extreme. In contrast, US realists saw indeterminacy as
Theorists of CLS argue that law is radically indeterminate, limited to a particular class of circumstances, in that the class of available legal elements seldom, if ever, logically or causally entails a unique outcome. It disavows traditional liberal theories of law that create a clear division between the legislature's role in creating laws and the judiciary's role in interpreting them. Judges are seen to normally decide matters by creating new laws as CLS views the law as ambiguous, which is in odds with liberal ideology.
a novel method of jurisprudence that emerged in the United States throughout the 1970s. Though it draws on politics, economics, linguistics, psychoanalysis, philosophy, literary criticism, and semiotics, it offers a generally Marxist critique of the core ideas of the law. Early on, CLS stood out for two reasons: first, it was based in legal study as opposed to sociology or political science; and second, it attempted to rectify the injustices inherent in legal doctrine. Though it is frequently referred to as the continuation of *legal realism, its interpretation of the idea that the law is unpredictable is actually far more extreme. In contrast, US realists saw indeterminacy as
Theorists of CLS argue that law is radically indeterminate, limited to a particular class of circumstances, in that the class of available legal elements seldom, if ever, logically or causally entails a unique outcome. It disavows traditional liberal theories of law that create a clear division between the legislature's role in creating laws and the judiciary's role in interpreting them. Judges are seen to normally decide matters by creating new laws as CLS views the law as ambiguous, which is in odds with liberal ideology.
- Published on
Legal Terms - critical race theory (CRT)
A radical movement within *jurisprudence that traces its origin to a conference held in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1989. It aims to refute the traditional liberal approach to civil rights issues, particularly the idea that social justice may be viewed in a color-blind manner. This approach is sometimes referred to as "outsider jurisprudence." The privileged status held by middle-class, primarily White academics is considered by CRT as a significant barrier to a thorough examination of the racism believed to be ingrained in the law, its regulations, ideas, and institutions. Adherents
typically contend that the only people who can truly represent oppressed racial minority are those who have personally experienced the unfairness and humiliation of prejudice. It is argued that the formal structures of the law replicate the reality of a privileged White male elite, whose culture, way of life, attitudes, and norms make up the dominant "neutrality" of the legal system.
A radical movement within *jurisprudence that traces its origin to a conference held in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1989. It aims to refute the traditional liberal approach to civil rights issues, particularly the idea that social justice may be viewed in a color-blind manner. This approach is sometimes referred to as "outsider jurisprudence." The privileged status held by middle-class, primarily White academics is considered by CRT as a significant barrier to a thorough examination of the racism believed to be ingrained in the law, its regulations, ideas, and institutions. Adherents
typically contend that the only people who can truly represent oppressed racial minority are those who have personally experienced the unfairness and humiliation of prejudice. It is argued that the formal structures of the law replicate the reality of a privileged White male elite, whose culture, way of life, attitudes, and norms make up the dominant "neutrality" of the legal system.
- Published on
Legal Terms - cross-appeals
When one or both parties disagree with the lower court's decision, they may file an appeal together. For instance, a claimant in a similar situation may appeal on the grounds that the damages granted are excessively small, whereas a defendant may appeal a verdict finding him accountable for damages.
When one or both parties disagree with the lower court's decision, they may file an appeal together. For instance, a claimant in a similar situation may appeal on the grounds that the damages granted are excessively small, whereas a defendant may appeal a verdict finding him accountable for damages.
- Published on
Legal Terms - cross-examination
the interrogation of a *witness by an entity other than the one who summoned them. It could be directed towards the issue, i.e., intended to obtain information favorable to the party conducting it and to raise questions about the veracity of the evidence presented against that party; or to
credit, i.e., intended to raise questions about the reliability of the witnessDuring the cross-examination, leading questions could be asked.
the interrogation of a *witness by an entity other than the one who summoned them. It could be directed towards the issue, i.e., intended to obtain information favorable to the party conducting it and to raise questions about the veracity of the evidence presented against that party; or to
credit, i.e., intended to raise questions about the reliability of the witnessDuring the cross-examination, leading questions could be asked.
- Published on
Legal Terms -Crown
The legally vested office (a *corporation sole) in the United Kingdom that holds supreme power. The sovereign (a king or queen) is the one who occupying it at any given time. The Act of Settlement 1701, as modified by His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 (which removed Edward VIII and his heirs from the line of succession), governs the hereditary right to the Crown. Most of the UK's governmental powers are now granted directly by statute to ministers, the judiciary, and other individuals and organizations. However, the sovereign still retains a small set of common law powers, referred to as *royal prerogatives, which can only be used in extraordinary situations and only on the advice of ministers. while actuality, the minister—rather than the sovereign—exercises these common law authorities and is referred to as the Crown while doing so.
The Crown Proceedings Act of 1947 made it possible to bring civil lawsuits against the Crown, which were previously unsuitable at common law.One can still not bring a personal lawsuit against the sovereign.
The legally vested office (a *corporation sole) in the United Kingdom that holds supreme power. The sovereign (a king or queen) is the one who occupying it at any given time. The Act of Settlement 1701, as modified by His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 (which removed Edward VIII and his heirs from the line of succession), governs the hereditary right to the Crown. Most of the UK's governmental powers are now granted directly by statute to ministers, the judiciary, and other individuals and organizations. However, the sovereign still retains a small set of common law powers, referred to as *royal prerogatives, which can only be used in extraordinary situations and only on the advice of ministers. while actuality, the minister—rather than the sovereign—exercises these common law authorities and is referred to as the Crown while doing so.
The Crown Proceedings Act of 1947 made it possible to bring civil lawsuits against the Crown, which were previously unsuitable at common law.One can still not bring a personal lawsuit against the sovereign.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Crown Agents for Overseas Governments and Administrations
an organization that provides commercial, financial, and professional services to foreign governments, international organizations, and public authorities under the auspices of the Crown Agents Act of 1979. Following the revelation of significant financial losses between 1968 and 1974, the organization underwent a structural change through the 1979 Act, and a tribunal of inquiry was established to look into its operations during that time.
an organization that provides commercial, financial, and professional services to foreign governments, international organizations, and public authorities under the auspices of the Crown Agents Act of 1979. Following the revelation of significant financial losses between 1968 and 1974, the organization underwent a structural change through the 1979 Act, and a tribunal of inquiry was established to look into its operations during that time.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Crown Court
a court established by the Courts Act of 1971 to replace the authority previously held by *quarter sessions and *assizes, which
were eliminated by the same Act. It is a Senior Court for Wales and England. The Crown Court is a court that hears appeals from *magistrates' courts and has unrestricted authority over all criminal cases tried on *indictment. The Crown Court is a single court that can convene at any location in England and Wales that the Lord Chancellor designates, unlike the courts it superseded.
a court established by the Courts Act of 1971 to replace the authority previously held by *quarter sessions and *assizes, which
were eliminated by the same Act. It is a Senior Court for Wales and England. The Crown Court is a court that hears appeals from *magistrates' courts and has unrestricted authority over all criminal cases tried on *indictment. The Crown Court is a single court that can convene at any location in England and Wales that the Lord Chancellor designates, unlike the courts it superseded.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Crown Court rules
Rules governing the *Crown Court's procedure and practices. The Courts Act of 1971 grants the Crown Court Rule Committee the authority to create the rules.
Rules governing the *Crown Court's procedure and practices. The Courts Act of 1971 grants the Crown Court Rule Committee the authority to create the rules.
- Published on
Legal Terms -Crown privilege
the Crown's ability to suppress documentary evidence in court cases on the grounds that making it public would be against the public interest. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 specifically protected it, although the concept of *public interest immunity has since superseded it.
the Crown's ability to suppress documentary evidence in court cases on the grounds that making it public would be against the public interest. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 specifically protected it, although the concept of *public interest immunity has since superseded it.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Crown proceedings
lawsuits filed under the 1947 Crown Proceedings Act against the Crown. The sovereign personally as well as the Crown (which included government agencies and all other public bodies) were initially immune from legal action due to the prerogative of perfection, which states that the King cannot do anything wrong. Nonetheless, the ability to file lawsuits against the Crown for property recovery or damages for breach of contract progressively increased. The Petition of Right Act 1860 eventually controlled the procedure controlling the proceedings, which took the form of a petition of right rather than a regular action. Petition of right was superseded by regular actions under the Crown Proceedings Act 1947. Additionally, it rendered the Crown subject to legal action for any torts done by employees or servants while they were working for them, as well as for violating any statutory obligations that the Crown is required to uphold as an employer and property occupier. It had no bearing on *Crown privilege or the assumption of *interpretation that statutes do not bind the Crown.
In the past, military personnel who were killed or suffered personal injuries while serving their country could not bring a tort lawsuit against the Crown. The controversial Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act of 1987 gave them this ability, although it was not retroactive. Smith & Others v. Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, [2013] WLR (D) 239 is an example of a case like this.
lawsuits filed under the 1947 Crown Proceedings Act against the Crown. The sovereign personally as well as the Crown (which included government agencies and all other public bodies) were initially immune from legal action due to the prerogative of perfection, which states that the King cannot do anything wrong. Nonetheless, the ability to file lawsuits against the Crown for property recovery or damages for breach of contract progressively increased. The Petition of Right Act 1860 eventually controlled the procedure controlling the proceedings, which took the form of a petition of right rather than a regular action. Petition of right was superseded by regular actions under the Crown Proceedings Act 1947. Additionally, it rendered the Crown subject to legal action for any torts done by employees or servants while they were working for them, as well as for violating any statutory obligations that the Crown is required to uphold as an employer and property occupier. It had no bearing on *Crown privilege or the assumption of *interpretation that statutes do not bind the Crown.
In the past, military personnel who were killed or suffered personal injuries while serving their country could not bring a tort lawsuit against the Crown. The controversial Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act of 1987 gave them this ability, although it was not retroactive. Smith & Others v. Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, [2013] WLR (D) 239 is an example of a case like this.
