Washington established precedents that would shape and define the future of the Executive Branch. His precedents defined the role of government and the image the people had of the presidency. In this essay I will discuss four precedents that I believe to be the most important and influential to the presidency of America. The first precedent I believe to be important is the organization of the Executive Branch. Washington relied on the advice of the department heads. This set the precedent of including the
Premium President of the United States Separation of powers United States
Topic- Discuss the advantages & disadvantages of following the practice of precedent in a legal sense. Answer:- The doctrines of binding precedent is concerned with the importance of case laws in English legal system. If one case has decided a point of law then it is logical that solution will be looked at in the future. The American Judge‚ Oliver Wendell said ‘the life of the law has not been logic it has been experience’‚ Miles Kingston put it another way: binding precedent means ‘A trick which
Premium Appeal Case law Common law
controversy of judicial review which at extreme points‚ is called judicial activism‚ is a concept new to India. Judicial review can be defined as the judiciary‚ in the exercise of its own independence‚ checking and cross checking the working of the other organs of the government‚ while trying to uphold the ideal of ‘the rule of law’. Judicial activism more reformist in character is often confused with judicial review. According to Black’s Law Dictionary‚ judicial activism is “a philosophy of judicial decision-making
Premium Law Separation of powers Judicial review
exemplifies the protection of civil right and liberties with judicial activism. When the rights of the American citizen are on the line than the judiciary should utilize the powers invested in them to protect and enforce what is constitutional. However‚ in times of controversy‚ where personal preference or aspects of religious or personal nature are at hand‚ the judiciary should exercise their power with finesse‚ thereby acting out judicial restraint. An example of such is in the case of Engel v.
Free Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution Brown v. Board of Education
The Mauritian Economy: 2012 Outlook Executive Summary Bracing for another storm While the Mauritian economy has been resilient thus far‚ the flip-flops in select Government policies have sent mixed signals to both the private sector and potential investors. Nonetheless‚ the economy grew at an estimated 4% in 2011 driven by a resurgent textile industry‚ and a strong performance by the financial sector. A year ago we had believed that the worst was behind; however‚ the issues surrounding the
Premium Inflation Mauritius Financial services
Judicial creativity Judges are unable to develop the law as it would be considered unfair. If a defendant commits an act which is not considered criminal‚ but the judge then decides that it is‚ therefore changing the law‚ this would be considered unfair for the defendant. This would be seen as the retrospective effect. Parliament makes the law‚ following a lengthy process‚ and then the judges must follow parliament’s decision. They must follow precedent of higher court judges. This is known as
Premium Stare decisis Judge Ratio decidendi
practiced. I noticed that the judicial branch usually restrain themselves from involving in critical civil policy‚ but will be active when the time comes when the general public‚ in which the case is decided‚ feels a change is needed. We have enough evidence to see how our judicial branch should act. Should the judicial branch be more active towards shaping American policy or restrain as long as possible before being forced to act upon very critical civil policies? Judicial activism is the view that
Premium United States United States Constitution President of the United States
Judicial Precedent is the way that English Common Law has evolved since the time of Henry II when courts were unified into a national system‚ making it common throughout England. Integral to it is the Latin phrase ‘stare decisis’ which literally means ‘to stand by what has been decided’. Its meaning in the case of judicial precedent is very similar‚ that a Judge will go by the same ruling as a previous judge has in the same cases; providing that the precedent comes from a higher or equal court‚ if
Free Common law Law Precedent
Doctrine of precedent is recognized in Indian legal system also. The main principles of doctrine of precedent as applicable in India are: 1. All inferior and subordinate court is bound by the decision of the High courts to which they are subordinate. Decisions of other High court are of only persuasive value for the subordinate court. Thus High court can bind only those inferior courts which are within their territorial jurisdiction. As for example district courts of Delhi are bound to follow the
Premium Supreme court Court Judge
will explain the different ’levels’ there are in the English system. My second point is Stare Decisis and what it is. This point is made up of several questions that I will answer; why have binding precedent? What has to be followed? That is Obiter Dicta and Ratio Decidendi? What is persuasive precedent and who uses it and how it is used? When is a judge bound? Can the Stare Decisis be avoided? And lastly: How has Stare Decisis handicapped the development of the English law? The hierarchy of the
Premium Stare decisis Appeal Precedent