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
THE DOCTRINE OF BINDING PRECEDENT INTRODUCTION The doctrine of binding precedent means the process whereby judges follow previously decided cases where the facts are of sufficient similarity. The doctrine of judicial precedent involves an application of the principle of stare decisis i.e.‚ to stand by the decided. In practice‚ this means that inferior courts are bound to apply the legal principles set down by superior courts in earlier cases. This provides consistency and predictability in the
Premium Stare decisis Case law Precedent
Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Restraint The debate between Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint really grabbed my attention. Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint are two different ways to interpret the constitution and its laws. Both interpretations have their own strengths and weaknesses‚ which is why it is so hard to come to a final decision of which is acceptable and which is not (in most cases). While at the debate I didn’t realize how many cases have boiled down to these two concepts
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Environmental Dynamism‚ Capital Structure and Performance: A Theoretical Integration and an Empirical Test Author(s): Roy L. Simerly and Mingfang Li Source: Strategic Management Journal‚ Vol. 21‚ No. 1 (Jan.‚ 2000)‚ pp. 31-49 Published by: John Wiley & Sons Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3094118 Accessed: 07/12/2009 10:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR ’s Terms and Conditions of Use‚ available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp.
Premium Capital structure Finance
Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Self-Restraint There are many differences between Judicial Activism and Judicial Self Restraint. Judicial Activism is the process by which judges take an active role in the governing process and Judicial Self Restraint is that Judges should not read their own philosophies into the constitution. Judicial activism is the view that the Supreme Court should be an active and creative partner with the legislative and executive branches in help shaping the government policy
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Plessy v. Ferguson
USU 1300 Is Judicial Activism in the best interest of the American people? Suzanna Sherry reminds us in her working paper‚ Why We Need More Judicial Activism‚ that “an examination of constitutional practice shows that too little activism produces worse consequences than does too much” and since we cannot assure judges are consistently “fair” it is better to be overly aggressive than overly restrained. In the most basic sense‚ judicial activism is when judges apply their own political opinion in
Premium
Judicial Precedent is another important source of law‚ it is an independent source of law‚ where there are no legislations on the particular point in statute Books‚ and Judicial Precedent works great. Judicial precedent has been accepted as one of the important sources of law in most of the legal systems. It is also a continuous‚ growing source of law. According to Salmond‚ the doctrine of precedent has two meanings‚ namely (1) in a loose sense precedent includes merely reported case-law which may
Free Common law Precedent Law
The British Constitution and Judicial Independence One of the basic principles of the British Constitution is judicial independence . Simply explained‚ this means that judges‚ in making their decisions‚ must not be influenced or coerced by outside forces (History Learning Site). This independence is assured by several safeguards which include fiscal autonomy‚ independent selection‚ and security of tenure. The purpose of these is to ensure that judges will render fair and impartial decisions without
Premium Separation of powers Human rights Law
ARTICLE VIII JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT Section 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable‚ and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government. Section
Free Law Judge Jury
1ST INTRA STATE CONFERENCE ON "VISTA OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW" TEAM CODE: T34 JUDICIAL ACCOUNABILITY: A FACET OF REALITY ABSTRACT: “Judiciary unlimited” is an unelected judiciary which is not accountable to anyone except itself. Today Judiciary has marginalised the Indian Government. The Supreme Court has its own laws and ways of interpretation with implementation. The issue is not whether something justifiable has come out of all this but whether the Courts have arrogated vast and uncontrolled
Free Law Separation of powers Judge