Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers—the power of the judiciary to supervise (judicial supervision) the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority. The doctrine varies between jurisdictions, so the procedure and scope of judicial review may differ between and within ...
An example is a civil court trying a criminal charge. Mistakes as to the existence of a jurisdictional fact or other requirement when the relevant act treats that fact or requirement as something which must exist objectively as a condition precedent to the validity of the challenged decision.
Judicial review of administrative decisions is different from an administrative appeal. When sitting in review of a decision, the Court will only look at the method in which the decision was arrived at, whereas in an administrative appeal, the correctness of the decision itself will be examined, usually by a higher body in the agency.
On 2 March 2012, Govt of India filed a review petition in Supreme Court seeking partial review of the court's 2 February 2012 order which had quashed 122 licenses. [5] The Govt questioned Supreme Court's authority over ruling against the first-come first-served policy but stayed away from challenging the cancellation of 122 licences issued during the tenure of A Raja as Telecom Minister. [6]
The development of the law is largely on the basis of judicial precedent, which in recent times has been subject to review by the courts. [55] The concept of the judicial precedent and of 'review by the courts' is a key component of the British common law upon which Indian law is based.
An example of a court using intermediate scrutiny came in Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), which was the first case in the United States Supreme Court which determined that statutory or administrative sex-based classifications were subject to an intermediate standard of judicial review. [4] In Mississippi University for Women v.
While dealing with the blatant misuse of Article 356, a nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court reiterated that judicial review is a basic structure of the Constitution and held that the proclamation of the imposing President's Rule in the State is subject to judicial review in S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994). [3] [28]
For example, an appellate brief to the highest court in a jurisdiction calls for a formal style—this shows proper respect for the court and for the legal matter at issue. An interoffice legal memorandum to a supervisor can probably be less formal—though not colloquial—because it is an in-house decision-making tool, not a court document.