| [Legal Question] Legal Bearing of Past Rulings |
Apad Wrote:Do we need to spell out that previous rulings only apply to those laws that are still on the books Sounds good. Don't want any major holes in this thing. Apad Wrote:the high court's ruling is the final word? Got that covered with: Quote:However, rulings made by the High Court of The South Pacific supersede those made by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific.
With regards to any holes, I was thinking that we should also mention that rulings on sections or the charter that still exist or are relevant to decisions the Supreme Court made rulings on. Not that there are any, as Hile pointed out but still.
The Court has unanimously agreed that rulings by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific are still legal, but only apply to laws that still exist as well as sections of the charter of the same. However, rulings made by the High Court of The South Pacific supersede those made by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific. Im not sure if that is worded correctly or if we should clean it up a bit. Hile any thoughts?
Apad
King of Haldilwe
I'm not so sure either. I'm going to have to think about the wording here a bit longer.
We really should wrap this ruling up? Hopo you have any thoughts on this?
Apad
King of Haldilwe
I would be inclined to agree with the view that the old Supreme Court rulings do still apply. The ruling was obviously made in respect of the law as it applied then (and not now) and I think as you've rightly pointed out that it is important to emphasise that where the law has changed or subsequent rulings occurred they take precedence. Ultimately, this should have been dealt with the High Court was created but sadly wasn't.
What I also think we need is a table summary of all legal question rulings - High or Supreme Court - so that they can be cited as precedence. I won't be able to do it this week but unless anyone else wants to do it I could have a go in early August. I've suggested some expanded wording on the draft. Not sure if needed but thought it might be worth thinking about: Quote:The Court has unanimously agreed that rulings by the former Supreme Court of The South Pacific are still legal, but given that they were made under the constitutional and legal framework in place at the time will only be considered to apply to laws that still exist in the Code of Laws of The South Pacific or in the Articles of the Charter of The South Pacific. However, Where rulings have subsequently been made by the High Court of The South Pacific that conflict either in part or wholly with past rulings of the Supreme Court of the South Pacific, the rulings of the High Court of the South Pacific shall supersede , either in part or wholly, those made by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific.
I think the expanded wording here will work. Thanks Hop.
Ding, ding, ding....we have a winner!! Thanks Hopo, very nicely written. I think that addresses all the issues and makes the courts opinion clear.
Also great idea with regards to the table summary. I believe TAC had a hard time finding previous rulings by the SC and the ines he did find are in a terrible format and difficult to read. Id be happy to help you with that project in anyway i can, just give a shout.
Apad
King of Haldilwe
The link provided for the Supreme Court Case Archives doesn't work. I checked the other forums, but I couldn't find any other references to the case archives.
I was never good at fluffing things up to sound so official (I like to simplify things) so, I'm in agreement with the expanded wording. Very well done Hop.
[HCLQ1514]
July 26th, 2015
Petitioner
Awe
Presiding Justices
Hileville, TAC and Apad
Non-Presiding Justice
Hopolis
Question: Are rulings made by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific still legal? Majority Opinion
Hileville, TAC and Apad
The Court has unanimously agreed that rulings by the former Supreme Court of The South Pacific are still legal, but given that they were made under the constitutional and legal framework in place at the time will only be considered to apply to laws that still exist in the Code of Laws of The South Pacific or in the Articles of the Charter of The South Pacific. Where rulings have subsequently been made by the High Court of The South Pacific that conflict either in part or wholly with past rulings of the Supreme Court of the South Pacific, the rulings of the High Court of the South Pacific shall supersede , either in part or wholly, those made by the Supreme Court of The South Pacific.
This is the updated draft.
Aye or Amend?
|
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
I am a Super Villain
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |