Shakespeare in My Canada Desmond Manderson and Paul Yachnin created the Shakespeare Moot Court Project in 2002, aimed at exploring the interpretative nature of law and literature in relation to Shakespeare. In this court, Shakespeare is law; his plays and sonnets form a body of law used to argue cases of various topics. In 2003-2004, the project took on the issue of same-sex marriage in “Love on Trial: Same Sex Marriage and the Law of Shakespeare.” Halpern v. Attorney General of Canada, a
Pastizzi Café Pty Ltd v Hossain was the case of Supreme Court of New South Wales in July in 2011. In this Case, there were three Plaintiff named Pastizzi Café Pty Ltd, Deborah Ross, Leonard Ross and Two Defendant named Miraj Hossain, Talukder Enterprises Pty Ltd. Micheal Fitzgearld was the solicitor of Plaintiffs and Mooney & Kennedy were Defendant Solicitor. In this case, Mr Hossain and Ms Ross started the business of Pastizzi in 2007.At that time Mr Hossain and Ms Ross were the directors and
Chapter 7: At the Moot The most interesting part of the moot is the oral rounds .This is the time for which you have worked for months. The adrenaline rush you get while speaking in front of the judge is memorable. Oral Rounds augment the important skills that a lawyer needs 1) Start an argument with a conclusion, 2) Differentiate fact from opinion, and 3) To organize a legal argument by issue rather than by a chronological narrative of the facts. Moot courts also teach professionalism and ethics
down before or after Martin was backed over. This could allow a judge to find that the closing of the garage and use of the car were related enough. Therefore, the third element could be met. However, the second element makes all of the conjecture moot, because it is clearly not satisfied. He had already clocked out which was not in the authorized time and space limits of his employment. A judge should find there are no grounds to sue for respondeat superior, because the rule of scope of employment
there has always been one question, what will we do with the juveniles when they entire the justice system? Here is the answer to that, the first juvenile court in the United States was established in Chicago in 1899 over 100 years ago. There have been significant modifications made to the juvenile court system since the late 1960’s due to Supreme Court decisions, federal legislation, and changes in the state legislation. Up until these changes were made, children who broke the law were treated the same
The jury system has been around for hundreds of years. It first came to be at the year 1733 an case in colonial New York that involved John Peter Zenger who worked for a newspaper company. John was tried for speaking against the government and making people stand by his side for he said that his criticisms were true. For the government to avoid this he created what we call today a jury system to help the judge figure if he was guilty or innocent. Most of the time the jury is wrong because most cases
Baig’s defence was that the two parking attendants were not in a state of fear or alarm and as such a breach of section 38(1) had not been committed. This argument was rightly rejected by the court. It is not a requirement of section 38(1) that Baig’s behaviour causes fear or alarm, it is sufficient if a reasonable person would be likely to suffer fear or
The jury system in the United States has served the country well for a long time, but it should not decide cases for the justice system in the future. While on the outside it may seem to be an efficient system, the truth is that it possesses a number of flaws that makes it unfit for the justice system. Reginald Rose’s short story, Twelve Angry Men, displays the problems with this system through the jury of a boy accused of murdering his own father. As the jurors discussed about the boy’s outcome
overly focused on extralegal information that, in theory, is irrelevant to the guilt decision in criminal cases and to the liability judgment in civil cases. Others have asked whether they are able to understand and apply their instructions in the court room. Lastly, it has been asked whether jurors are able to understand complicated issues that could arise in complex cases. In reaching their verdicts, jurors work to make decisions that are based on evidence that has been presented. Jurors tend to
There were many factors in the Amirault family case that led to injustice and made this case unfair. Main factors that impacted this case were profiling, false confessions and the violation of rights. Also, Justice Fried saw many corruptions in the legal process in this case. Justice Fried pointed out there were hysteria, suggestibility, and violation of constitutional rights in the Amirault case. One thing about this case that was very surprising, the fact children were basically brainwashed.
Good Morning ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I am honored to represent my client Mr. Winston Smith in the case of Winston vs Oceania. You have heard the prosecution’s case claiming that my client is a criminal and deserves to be where he is, and that my client willingly broke Oceanic law. However, I will prove that not only is my client not a criminal, but instead a hero. Exhibit A I am holding in front of you, your garden variety notepad harmless right yet this item was enough to start the process
the other half consist of the judge, the prosecutors next to the defendant leaving a gap between them, and on the side is where the jury sits.Yet today when I when to go see one in person what I saw was not what I expected. Today I enter criminal court building located on 100th centre street. As soon as I walk in the first thing I notice is how the building looks. To me it was kind of dark as if the lights was dying. Then I notice the guards and metal detectors. Once I finish with that I had proceeded
To most, the job of the defendant is usually seen as being far more easy in comparison to the prosecution’s side. This is because of the famous phrase: “innocent until proven guilty”. The idea that the defendant’s job is easier is put to the test in a play that is named Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee. The defendant, Henry Drummond, has to defend Bert Cates. A man that has broken a strictly enforced law in Hillsboro, and a man that everyone knows is guilty of breaking the law
Introduction For the purposes of this assignment, I attended the court on three separate occasions. On February 15 and March 1, 2018, I had an opportunity to observe the criminal trial of R v Bullen. On March 2, 2018, I observed a criminal trial of R v D. D. R v Bullen In R v Bullen, the accused David Bullen, was charged with the drug trafficking and organized crime as a result of the police project Adelaide. This was a very lengthy and complex trial, involving offences committed across Ontario
Part 1: Appeal to the Industrial Court of Queensland Prosecution counsel submissions: 1. Pursuant to section 561 of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (the Act), the Prosecution counsel seeks an appeal to the Industrial Court of Queensland, from the decision of the Industrial Magistrates Court given on 11/10/2017. 2. The grounds of appeal are: - The learned Industrial Magistrate erred in concluding there was no case to answer in respect to an offence under subsection 534(2)
The Australian Court System The Australian court system is structured as a hierarchy, meaning that some courts have more power than others. In this hierarchy there are two sections of courts; the state courts such as the supreme court, county court, court of appeal, magistrates court and specialised courts like children’s court for example and tribunals like VCAT all of these are set up under state legislation. The second section being federal courts such as the High court which comes under commonwealth
The American Jury system is a judicial process that has been revered as being one of the key practices that ensure the liberties that the United States holds dear. The founding fathers considered it vital to ensuring a fair trial and it has continued to be seen as such. This system isn’t perfect, but it’s still an incredibly valuable tool for democracy, if used well. The American jury system, when used correctly, engages citizens with their local government, creates a wide distribution of power,
of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1981) 95 LSJS, 419 12. The Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) HCA 151 CLR, 447 Ground of Appeal The grounds of appeal the appellants identified is that the principles applied in the Supreme Court of South Australia (Full Court), from the case Blomely v. Ryan did not apply to the case in dispute.13 The appellants further specified that these principles did not apply as “no situation existed that the bank” would not “naturally expect”. In addition, the bank
and Bar Association Queensland ('D'). He also brought an appeal in the Court of Appeal but it was dismissed. Facts P was convicted by grievous bodily harm of his colleague and sentenced four years imprisonment with parole date fixed after two years. He hired two solicitors who are engaged with Mr Tim Carmody SC (present Chef Justice)and Mr Paul Smith (Honour)of counsel but both appeal were dismissed by the High Court. He sued BAQ for breaching
any components of the offense. The issue of driving those articulations for grounds was important to Charter applications that the safeguard deserted. Basically, at that point, with the end goal of this trial, the court does not think about any announcements of Mr. Singh to a cop. The resistance contends that the Crown has not set up to the essential standard that Mr. Singh had worked his engine vehicle at the applicable time.