Judicial execution

The Judicial Investigation Department (Spanish, Organismo de Investigación Judicial, OIJ), is a unit of the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica. Currently its director is Walter Espinoza.It was founded in 1973 as a subsidiary body of the Criminal Courts of Public Prosecutions in scientific discovery and verification of the crimes and their responsible.

Judicial Committee of Her Britannic Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council

Judicial Commission of Pakistan (informally JCP) is a commission for the appointment of Supreme Court and High Court Judges in Pakistan. The Chief Justice of Pakistan is the Chairman JCP.On 20th April 2010, 18th Constitutional Amendment was passed in the Parliament of Pakistan. In pursuance of the 18th Amendments, a Judicial Commission was proposed to be created to recommend the appointment of Judges of the Superior Courts in Pakistan. Following is the collective text of the Article 175 (A) which was inserted in the constitution of Pakistan through this amendment.Article 175 A. Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court, High Courts and the Federal Shariat Court:(1) There shall be a Judicial Commission of Pakistan, hereinafter in this Article referred to as the Commission, for appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court, High Courts and the Federal Shariat Court, as hereinafter provided.(2) For appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court, the Commission shall consist of--- (i) Chief Justice of Pakistan - Chairman; (ii) [four] most senior Judges of the Supreme Court as Members; (iii) a former Chief Justice or a former Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to be nominated by the Chief Justice of Paki-stan, in consultation with the [four] member Judges, for a term of two years - Member; (iv) Federal Minister for Law and Justice as Member; (v) Attorney-General for Pakistan as Member; (vi) a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan nomi-nated by the Pakistan Bar Council for a term of two years as Member.(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1) or clause (2), the President shall appoint the most senior Judge of the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice of Pakistan.(4) The Commission may make rules regulating its procedure.......(5 to 7)(8) The Commission by majority of its total membership shall nominate to the Parliamentary Committee one person, for each vacancy of a Judge in the Supreme Court, a High Court or the Federal Shariat Court, as the case may be.(9) The Parliamentary Committee, hereinafter in this Article referred to as the Committee, shall consist of the following eight members, namely: (i) four members from the Senate; and (ii) four members from the National Assembly. Provided that when the National Assembly is dissolved, the total member-ship of the parliamentary Committee shall consist of the members from the Senate only mentioned in paragraph (i) and the provisions of this Arti-cle shall, mutatis mutandis, apply.(10) Out of the eight members of the Committee, four shall be from the Treasury Benches, two from each House and four from the Opposition Benches, two from each House. The nomination of members from the Treasury Benches shall be made by the Leader of the House and from the Opposition Benches by the Leader of the Opposition.(11) Secretary, Senate shall act as the Secretary of the Committee.(12) The Committee on receipt of a nomination from the Commission may confirm the nominee by majority of its total membership within fourteen days, failing which the nomination shall be deemed to have been con-firmed: Provided that the Committee for reasons to be recorded, may not confirm the nomination by three-fourth majority of its total mem-bership within the said period. Provided further that if a nomination is not confirmed by the Committee it shall forward its decision with reasons so recorded to the Commission through the Prime Minister. Provided further that if a nomination is not confirmed, the Com-mission shall send another nomination.(13) The Committee shall send the name of the nominee confirmed by it or deemed to have been confirmed to the Prime Minister who shall for-ward the same to the President for appointment.(14) No action or decision taken by the Commission or a Committee shall be invalid or called in question only on the ground of the existence of a vacancy therein or of the absence of any member from any meeting thereof.(15) The meetings of the Committee shall be held in camera and the re-cord of its proceedings shall be maintained.(16) The provisions of Article 68 shall not apply to the proceedings of the Committee.(17) The Committee may make rules for regulating its procedure.Through 18th Amendment in 2010, Pakistan got two forums for appointment of judges to the superior judiciary: a Judicial Commission with representation from the judiciary, lawyers and the federal government, responsible for recommending names of perspective judges; and a parliamentary committee [PC] to approve or reject these names but with assigning reasons if some name is rejected.This mechanism had in fact curtailed the powers of the President and the political executive, which was also objectionable in deed, but the propaganda in the media was made that "CJP’s powers have been cur-tailed" in the name of ‘meaningful consultation’ [the phrase devised and more emphasized by the CJP Sajjad Ali Shah, in fact]The 18th amendment also provided (vide Para 3 of Article 175A) that the president shall appoint the senior most judge of the Supreme Court to the office of the CJP thus formally recognising the principle of seniority and legitimate expectancy enunciated by the apex court in the Al-Jihad case and subsequently reiterated in some other cases.

Szu1-fa3 Yüan4

Judicial measures

Judicial interference

Judicial Tyranny

The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML or the Panel) is a special body within the United States federal court system which manages multidistrict litigation. It was established by Congress in 1968 under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, and has the authority to determine whether civil actions pending in two or more federal judicial districts should be transferred to a single federal district court for pretrial proceedings. If such cases are determined to involve one or more common questions of fact and are transferred, the Panel will then select the district court and assign a judge or judges to preside over the litigation. The purpose of the transfer or "centralization" process is to conserve the resources of the parties and their counsel, as well as the judiciary, thus avoiding duplication of discovery and preventing inconsistent pretrial rulings.The Chief Justice of the United States appoints the members of the Panel, which is composed of no more than seven district and/or court of appeals judges, each of whom must be from a different judicial circuit. In addition to their participation on the Panel, the members continue to serve as judges for the courts to which they were originally appointed. The Panel convenes hearings in various locations around the country to facilitate the participation of parties and their counsel. The Office of the Clerk of the Panel is located at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building in Washington, D.C.As of September 30, 2016, the Panel has centralized 1,669 dockets involving nearly 594,000 individual cases. There have been over 1,065 additional docket requests that were not centralized. These dockets encompass litigation categories as diverse as securities fraud, drugs and other products liability cases, intellectual property infringement, antitrust law violations, airplane crashes, employment practices and consumer data security breaches. Additional statistical information can be found at the Panel's official site.

Judicial override

Judicial District of San Martín

Judicial District of Arequipa

Judicial Torture

Judicial Restraint

Judicial nominating commissions

The Judicial Service Commission is an adjunct of the Ministry of Justice of the Federal Government of Somalia.

Judicial activism in India

Judicial Vicar

Judicial College

InternetArchiveBot

Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council

yes

In Spain, a judicial district (Spanish: Partido judicial) is a territorial unit for the administration of justice, composed of one or more municipalities bordering and within the same province.Among the municipalities that make up the judicial parties, one of them, usually the largest or highest number of contentious matters occur, it is called head of judicial party. In this head is the seat of one or more courts of first instance and instruction. Leading the rest of municipalities of the administrative area are the magistrates' courts.

Judicial District of Tacna

Judicial jurisdiction

Judicial restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional, though what counts as obviously unconstitutional is itself a matter of some debate. Judicial restraint is sometimes regarded as the opposite of judicial activism.

Judicial corporal punishment (JCP) refers to the infliction of corporal punishment as a result of a sentence by a court of law. The punishment can be caning, bastinado, birching, whipping, or strapping. The practice was once commonplace in many countries, but it is no longer practised in any European country, and it has now been abolished in most Western countries, but remains a legal punishment in some Asian, African and Middle Eastern countries.

Judicial review (theory)

Judicial injunction

Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary needs to be kept away from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government, or from private or partisan interests. Judicial Independence is vital and important to the idea of separation of powers.Different countries deal with the idea of judicial independence through different means of judicial selection, or choosing judges.

Judicial branch of government

Judicial District of Madre de Dios

April 2017

Judicial activism is said to be the overreaching or incorrect interpretation of the law, which are thought by critics to be a misuse of the power of interpretation of the law by a judge or judges for political or personal reasons.

The Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council (JELACC) of the Philippines is a body created by a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed on May 13, 2008, which serves as "the forum and venue for the representatives of the 3 branches of the government to undertake measures on matters affecting the primacy of the rule of law, specifically tastked to identify the problems and issues, formulate solutions, and to implement them." The historical move which was aimed "to strengthen the consultation and coordination among the three branches of government in upholding the rule of law." Jelacc was the brainchild of Kiko Pangilinan, first proposed on the July 16–17, 2007 Manila Hotel Summit on Extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances in the Philippines.

New Delhi

The Judicial District of Lima is one of the 28 Judicial Districts of the Judicial System of Peru.Its main seat is in the city of Lima and its jurisdiction extends to 35 of the 43 Districts of Lima. The remaining eight districts (Independencia, San Martín de Porres, Comas, Los Olivos, Puente Piedra, Ancón, Santa Rosa, and Carabayllo) are under jurisdiction of the Judicial District of Cono Norte.

President Roosevelt explains to the public in a Fireside Chat why he is seeking to reorganise the US Judiciary.

Appointed by Monarch on advice of Prime Minister.

The Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that strengthened the mandatory retirement provisions previously instituted by the Judicial Pensions Act 1959 for members of the British judiciary.While the 1959 Act forbade service past age 75 by any judges appointed thereafter (Lord Denning being the last exempt jurist), the 1993 Act made the ordinary retirement age 70, and while enabling a minister (presumably the Lord Chancellor) to allow individual judges to remain in office until 75, it expressly forbids persons aged over 75 to hold any judicial post whatsoever. An exception is the post of Lord Chancellor, a political appointee.

Judicial inquiry

Judicial Yuan of the Republic of China

Judicial review (law)

Judicial activism in Canada

Judicial Committee of the House of Lords

Judicial Commission of Pakistan (informally JCP) is a commission for the appointment of Supreme Court and High Court Judges in Pakistan. The Chief Justice of Pakistan is the Chairman JCP.On 20th April 2010, 18th Constitutional Amendment was passed in the Parliament of Pakistan. In pursuance of the 18th Amendments, a Judicial Commission was proposed to be created to recommend the appointment of Judges of the Superior Courts in Pakistan.

Judicial costume

Judicial Service Commission (Fiji)

Judicial combat

Judicial biography

Judicial districts of Spain

Judicial Council

Judicial discretion is the power of the judiciary to make some legal decisions according to their discretion. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the ability of judges to exercise discretion is an aspect of judicial independence. Where appropriate, judicial discretion allows a judge to decide a legal case or matter within a range of possible decisions.However, where the exercise of discretion goes beyond constraints set down by legislation, by binding precedent, or by a constitution, the court may be abusing its discretion and undermining the rule of law. In that case, the decision of the court may be ultra vires, and may sometimes be characterized as judicial activism.Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the following on this subject:Judicial power, as contradistinguished from the power of the laws, has no existence. Courts are the mere instruments of the law, and can will nothing. When they are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by law; and, when that is discerned, it is the duty of the court to follow it. Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge, always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the legislature; or, in other words, to the will of the law.Concerns with regard to recidivism and other law and order issues have led to the introduction of mandatory sentencing. E.g. three-strikes laws and most sex offender registry laws in US are examples of laws carrying severe consequences, and which does not leave room for sentencing judges to consider the actual gravity of the offense, thus significantly limiting judicial discretion in sentencing. Introduction of mandatory minimum in criminal sentencing is often viewed as a shift of judicial power from judges to prosecutors, who are capable of affecting the length of potential sentence through their charging decision, e.g. filing charges on lesser included offense and dropping the charges carrying mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory sentencing laws have been particularly popular among legislators in the United States. This has provoked formation of non-profit organizations such as Families Against Mandatory Minimums, Women Against Registry and RSOL to lobby for reinstatement of judicial discretion in criminal sentencing.

A judicial nominating commission (also judicial nominating committee, judicial nominating board) in the United States, is a body used by some U.S. states to recommend or select potential justices and judges for appointments by state governments.Judicial nominating commissions are often established by the state constitution as part of merit selection plans. They are designed to be independent bodies. A common procedure is for the commission to receive applications for that position and forward three names to the governor, who has some number of days (often 60) to select one.The powers, size, role, and makeup of judicial nominating commissions vary widely from state to state. Some commissions only make recommendations for appellate courts (the state supreme court and any intermediate appellate courts). Others make recommendations for trial court judge appointments as well.Judicial nominating commissions are also used on the county level, such as in some Alabama counties.

The Supreme Court of India (Hindi: भारत का सर्वोच्च न्यायालय) is the highest judicial forum and final court of appeal of India established under Constitution of India, as per which Supreme Court is the highest constitutional court and acts as the guardian of Constitution. India follow the integrated and yet independent judiciary.Since independence, judiciary has been playing a very active role in dispensing the justice since A K Gopalan vs State of Madras case(1950) followed by Shankari Prasad case, etc. However, judiciary remained submissive till 1960s but its assertiveness started in 1973 when Allahabad High Court rejected the candidature of Indira Gandhi and introduction of PIL by Justice P N Bhagwati further expanded its scope.

Judicial interpretation in South Africa

Judicial District of Apurímac

Judicial autopsy

Judicial District of Canete

Judicial Studies Center

Judicial restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional, though what counts as obviously unconstitutional is itself a matter of some debate. Judicial restraint is sometimes regarded as the opposite of judicial activism. In deciding questions of constitutional law, judicially restrained jurists go to great lengths to defer to the legislature. Judicially restrained judges respect stare decisis, the principle of upholding established precedent handed down by past judges.

Judicial arrondissement of Brussels

Judicial Conference

Judicial interference is the actions of courts or judicial officers in matters that are interpreted by some as beyond their constitutionally established role.

council

Judicial reform is the complete or partial political reform of a country's judiciary. Judicial reform is often done as a part of wider reform of the country's political system or a legal reform.Areas of the judicial reform often include; codification of law instead of common law, moving from an inquisitorial system to an adversarial system, establishing stronger judicial independence with judicial councils or changes to appointment procedure, establishing mandatory retirement age for judges or enhancing independence of prosecution.

The province of Quebec is divided into 36 judicial districts by the Territorial Division Act, R.S.Q., chapter D-11. Each district has a seat where the courthouse is located, although some have more than one courthouse, service point, or itinerant court location.

Judicial Circuits Act

Judicial independence in Singapore is protected by the Constitution, statutes such as the State Courts Act and Supreme Court of Judicature Act, and the common law. Independence of the judiciary is the principle that the judiciary should be separated from legislative and executive power, and shielded from inappropriate pressure from these branches of government, and from private or partisan interests. It is crucial as it serves as a foundation for the rule of law and democracy.To safeguard judicial independence, Singapore law lays down special procedures to be followed before the conduct of Supreme Court judges may be discussed in Parliament and for their removal from office for misconduct, and provides that their remuneration may not be reduced during their tenure. By statute, judicial officers of the State Courts, and the Registrar, Deputy Registrar and assistant registrars of the Supreme Court have immunity from civil suits, and are prohibited from hearing and deciding cases in which they are personally interested. The common law provides similar protections and disabilities for Supreme Court judges. Both the State Courts and Supreme Court have power to punish for contempt of court, though only the Supreme Court may convict persons of the offence of scandalizing the court.The Chief Justice and other Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President acting on the advice of Cabinet. The President must consult the Chief Justice when appointing other judges, and may exercise personal discretion to refuse to make an appointment if he does not concur with the Cabinet's advice. Supreme Court justices enjoy security of tenure up to the age of 65 years, after which they cease to hold office. However, the Constitution permits such judges to be re-appointed on a term basis, as well as for judicial commissioners to be appointed for limited periods, including the hearing of single cases. Judicial officers of the State Courts are also appointed on a term basis by the Legal Service Commission (LSC), and can be transferred from the courts to other government departments to serve as legal officers, and vice versa. It has been claimed that this creates a risk of executive interference, although a 1986 inquiry into such allegations found no evidence of this.The courts exercise judicial review of executive actions and legislation for compliance with the Constitution, empowering statutes and administrative law principles. Though it has been noted that there is a low incidence of judicial disagreement with the executive, this may not be evidence of undue deference to the executive but may merely be that the executive has attained a high degree of fairness in its decision-making. The fact that a large number of defamation cases involving opponents of the Government have been decided in favour of the Government and members of the ruling People's Action Party has led to criticism that the judiciary is not impartial. On the other hand, it has been pointed out that the defendants in such cases have not been successful in proving the truth of the allegedly defamatory facts.

Judicial assistant

Gillian Thompson

Judicial opinion

Judicial Pensions Act 1959

Judicial Studies Board

The Israeli Judicial Committee (Hebrew: הוועדה לבחירת שופטים‎, translit. hawa'aada livchirat shoftim‎) is the body that appoints judges to Israeli courts.The committee was established in 1953, following the enactment of the Judges Bill. The founding of the committee was intended to prevent outside political pressure, and so ensure the independence of the judges.

Judicial nominating committees

Judicial review in England and Wales

Seal of the Supreme Court

Judicial District of Moquegua

Judicial branch of China

The Judicial Commission of Indonesia (Indonesian: Komisi Yudisial) was established as a consequence of the third amendment to the Constitution of Indonesia ratified by the Indonesian People's Consultative Assembly on 9 November 2001. The Commission's duty is to monitor the performance of judges, advise the House of Representatives on judicial appointments and review community complaints about the behavior and fairness of presiding judges.

May 2017

Judicial Commission of New South Wales

In United States jurisprudence, a judicial override is when a judge overrules a jury's determination.

Judicial citation

Judicial deference is the condition of a court yielding or submitting its judgment to that of another legitimate party, such as the executive in the case of national defense. It is most commonly found in countries, such as the United Kingdom, which lack an entrenched constitution, as the essential purpose of such documents is to limit the power of the legislature.

Judicial Districts of Nevada

Judicial Watch

Judicial Arrondissement of Brussels

President

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of Kenya is established under Article 171 of the Constitution of Kenya. The commission has 11 members with the initial team appointed in December 2010.

Judicial reform is the complete or partial political reform of a country's judiciary.

Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct.Actions that can be classified as judicial misconduct include: conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts (as an extreme example: "falsification of facts" at summary judgment); using the judge's office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives; accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office; having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case; treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; violating other specific, mandatory standards of judicial conduct, such as judicial rules of procedure or evidence, or those pertaining to restrictions on outside income and requirements for financial disclosure; and acting outside the jurisdiction of the court, or performance of official duties if the conduct might have a prejudicial effect on the administration of the business of the courts among reasonable people. Rules of official misconduct also include rules concerning disability, which is a temporary or permanent condition rendering judge unable to discharge the duties of the particular judicial office.A judicial investigative committee is a panel of judges selected to investigate a judicial misconduct complaint against a judge accused of judicial misconduct. Judicial investigative committees are rarely appointed. According to U.S. Court statistics, only 18 of the 1,484 judicial misconduct complaints filed in the United States Courts between September 2004 and September 2007 warranted the formation of judicial investigative committees.

Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission

Judicial review in England

Judicial offices of Scotland

Judicial astrology

Judicial court

The Judicial Districts of Peru are subdivisions of the Judicial System of Peru. There are 33 Judicial Districts in Peru:

The Judicial Arrondissement of Eupen (German: Gerichtsbezirk Eupen; French: Arrondissement judiciaire d'Eupen; Dutch: Gerechtelijk arrondissement Eupen) is a judicial arrondissement located in the Walloon Province of Liège, in Belgium. It comprises the 9 municipalities of the German-speaking Community. It is not an administrative arrondissement. All of its municipalities are a part of the Administrative Arrondissement of Verviers, which is divided into two judicial arrondissements.

最高法院

Judicial relief

Judicial astrology is the art of forecasting events by calculation of the planetary and stellar bodies and their relationship to the Earth. The term "judicial astrology" was mainly used in the Middle Ages and early Renaissance to mean the types of astrology that were considered to be heretical by the Catholic church, distinguished from the "natural astrology" such as medical astrology and meteorological astrology, which were seen as acceptable because they were a part of the natural sciences of the time.

The Judicial Service Commission is a body specially constituted by the South African Constitution to recommend persons for appointment to the judiciary of South Africa.

Convention; Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876

Constitutional Court

Judicial flogging

Judicial control

Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993

Judicial activism (Canada)

Sz̄fǎ Yuàn

Judicial Confirmation Network

Judicial Committee, His Britannic Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council

Judicial councils are panels of the United States federal courts that are charged with making "necessary and appropriate orders for the effective and expeditious administration of justice" within their circuits. Among their responsibilities is judicial discipline, the formulation of circuit policy, the implementation of policy directives received from the Judicial Conference of the United States, and the annual submission of a report to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts on the number and nature of orders entered during the year that relate to judicial misconduct. Each US judicial circuit has a judicial council, which consists of the chief judge of the circuit and an equal number of circuit judges and district judges of the circuit.

Judicial Districts of Peru

Washington, D.C., U.S. 20024

Judicial Yuan of Taiwan

Judicial Branch of Colombia

Judicial behavior

Judicial deference

A judicial commissioner is person appointed on a non-permanent basis to a judicial office. In some countries, such as Malaysia and Singapore, judicial commissioners have the powers of full judges. In other jurisdictions their powers are limited.

Judicial Inquiry

Judicial District of Huánuco/Pasco

Judicial Disqualification

Judicial District of Tumbes

A Judicial officer is a person with the responsibilities and powers to facilitate, arbitrate, preside over, and make decisions and directions in regard to the application of the law.Judicial officers are typically categorized as judges, magistrates, puisne judicial officers such as justices of the peace or officers of courts of limited jurisdiction; and notaries public and commissioners of oaths. The powers of judicial officers vary and are usually limited to a certain jurisdiction.

司法院

Judicial retention

Judicial precedent

Dìfāng Fǎyuàn

A judicial nominating commission (also judicial nominating committee, judicial nominating board) in the United States, is a body used by some U.S. states to recommend or select potential justices and judges for appointments by state governments.Judicial nominating commissions are often established by the state constitution as part of merit selection plans. They are designed to be independent bodies.

Judicial System of Japan

Judicial misconduct complaint

Judicial independence in Singapore is protected by the Constitution, statutes such as the State Courts Act and Supreme Court of Judicature Act, and the common law. Independence of the judiciary is the principle that the judiciary should be separated from legislative and executive power, and shielded from inappropriate pressure from these branches of government, and from private or partisan interests.

The House of Lords, in addition to having a legislative function, historically also had a judicial function. It functioned as a court of first instance for the trials of peers, for impeachment cases, and as a court of last resort within the United Kingdom. In the latter case the House's jurisdiction was essentially limited to the hearing of appeals from the lower courts. Appeals were technically not to the House of Lords, but rather to the Queen-in-Parliament. By constitutional convention, only those lords who were legally qualified (Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, or Law Lords) heard the appeals, since World War II usually in what was known as the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords rather than in the chamber of the House.During the 20th and early 21st centuries, the judicial functions were gradually removed. The final trial of a peer in the House of Lords was in 1935, and in 1948, the use of special courts for trials of peers was abolished. In 2009 the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom assumed the functions as the new court of final appeal in the UK.

Judicial Circuits Act of 1866

Judicial District of Junín

The Judicial Council of California is the rule-making arm of the California court system. In accordance with the California Constitution and under the leadership of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California, the council is responsible for "ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice." It was created by an amendment to article VI of the California Constitution in 1926.

Judicial Procedure Reform Act of 1937

A judicial district or legal district denotes the territorial area for which a legal court (law) has jurisdiction.

Judicial Branch

Judicial Misconduct Complaint

The judicial reform of Alexander II is generally considered one of the most successful and consistent of all his reforms (along with the military reform). A completely new court system and order of legal proceedings were established. The main results were the introduction of a unified judicial system instead of a cumbersome set of estates of the realm courts, and fundamental changes in criminal trials.

Judicial Service Commission

Judicial Papyrus of Turin

Judicial activism in the European Union

Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary needs to be kept away from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government, or from private or partisan interests. Judicial Independence is vital and important to the idea of separation of powers.Different countries deal with the idea of judicial independence through different means of judicial selection, or choosing judges. One way to promote judicial independence is by granting life tenure or long tenure for judges, which ideally frees them to decide cases and make rulings according to the rule of law and judicial discretion, even if those decisions are politically unpopular or opposed by powerful interests. This concept can be traced back to 18th century England.In some countries, the ability of the judiciary to check the legislature is enhanced by the power of judicial review. This power can be used, for example, by mandating certain action when the judiciary perceives that a branch of government is refusing to perform a constitutional duty, or by declaring laws passed by the legislature unconstitutional.

Judicial activist

Judicial Watch is an American conservative non-partisan watchdog group that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate alleged misconduct by government officials. Founded in 1994, it has sued the administrations of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. Most of its lawsuits have been dismissed. As of October 2016 it was the plaintiff in more than 20 ongoing lawsuits involving Hillary Clinton.

syfaa Yuann

Judiciary

Judicial District of Apurimac

Judicial Nominating Commission

The Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 (frequently called the "court-packing plan") was a legislative initiative proposed by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt to add more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. Roosevelt's purpose was to obtain favorable rulings regarding New Deal legislation that the court had ruled unconstitutional. The central provision of the bill would have granted the President power to appoint an additional Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court, up to a maximum of six, for every member of the court over the age of 70 years and 6 months.In the Judiciary Act of 1869 Congress had established that the United States Supreme Court would consist of the Chief Justice and eight associate justices. During Roosevelt's first term the Supreme Court struck down several New Deal measures as being unconstitutional. Roosevelt sought to reverse this by changing the makeup of the court through the appointment of new additional justices who he hoped would rule his legislative initiatives did not exceed the constitutional authority of the government. Since the U.S. Constitution does not define the size of the Supreme Court, Roosevelt pointed out that it was within the power of the Congress to change it. The legislation was viewed by members of both parties as an attempt to stack the court, and was opposed by many Democrats, including Vice President John Nance Garner. The bill came to be known as Roosevelt's "court-packing plan".In November 1936, Roosevelt won a sweeping reelection victory. In the months following, Roosevelt boldly proposed to reorganize the federal judiciary by adding a new justice each time a justice reached age seventy and failed to retire. The legislation was unveiled on February 5, 1937, and was the subject of Roosevelt's 9th Fireside chat of March 9, 1937. Three weeks after the radio address the Supreme Court published an opinion upholding a Washington state minimum wage law in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish. The 5–4 ruling was the result of the apparently sudden jurisprudential shift by Associate Justice Owen Roberts, who joined with the wing of the bench supportive to the New Deal legislation. Since Roberts had previously ruled against most New Deal legislation, his support here was seen as a result of the political pressure the president was exerting on the court. Some interpreted his reversal as an effort to maintain the Court's judicial independence by alleviating the political pressure to create a court more friendly to the New Deal. This reversal came to be known as "the switch in time that saved nine"; however, recent legal-historical scholarship has called that narrative into question as Roberts's decision and vote in the Parrish case predated both the public announcement and introduction of the 1937 bill.Roosevelt's legislative initiative ultimately failed. The bill was held up in the Senate Judiciary Committee by Democratic committee chair Henry F. Ashurst, who delayed hearings in the Judiciary Committee, saying "No haste, no hurry, no waste, no worry—that is the motto of this committee." As a result of his delaying efforts, the bill was held in committee for 165 days, and opponents of the bill credited Ashurst as instrumental in its defeat. The bill was further undermined by the untimely death of its chief advocate in the U.S. Senate, Senate Majority Leader Joseph T. Robinson. Contemporary observers broadly viewed Roosevelt's initiative as political maneuvering. Its failure exposed the limits of Roosevelt's abilities to push forward legislation through direct public appeal. The public perception of his efforts here was in stark contrast to the reception of his legislative efforts during his first term. Roosevelt ultimately prevailed in establishing a majority on the court friendly to his New Deal legislation, though some scholars view Roosevelt's victory as pyrrhic.

Judicial custody

Supreme Court of Judicature Act

Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State

Act

Seal

Judicial minimalism refers to a philosophy in United States constitutional law which promotes itself as a politically moderate viewpoint such as that of retired Judge Sandra Day O'Connor. It is often compared to other judicial philosophies such as judicial activism, judicial originalism, and judicial textualism.

Judicial councils are panels of the United States federal courts that are charged with making "necessary and appropriate orders for the effective and expeditious administration of justice" within their circuits.

(भारत का उच्चतम न्यायालय)

Judicial duel

Judicial Procedure

Judicial corporal punishment

Judicial and Bar Council

यतो धर्मस्ततो जयः॥ Whence law , thence victory.

United States

Judicial nominating commission

Judicial branch of the government of the State of Iowa

Judicial District of Cusco

Judicial District of Cajamarca

Judicial District of Loreto

Judicial holding

Judicial activism in the european union

Judicial Reorganization Bill of 1937

Judicial opinions

Judicial Yuan

Judicial Palace

The Judicial Studies Center (Portuguese: Centro de Estudos Judiciários) is the Portuguese State Department which provides training for future judges and prosecutors who will perform in courts of law. It also organizes courses for current judges, prosecutors and lawyers concerning matters which are deemed useful for their activity. It was founded in 1980 and admits graduates in law who are selected after passing written and oral examinations as well as a psychological interview.Training involves classes at its facilities and practical experiment in courts of law, under the supervision of the Judicial Studies Center.Its facilities are located in Lisbon, in a building which served as a jail until 1974, for over 400 years. Formerly, it was the residence of part of the royal family and later it was the place where money was coined.

Judicial district

Judicial appointments in Canada are made by the federal government or provincial government. Superior and federal court judges are appointed by federal government, while inferior courts are appointed by the provincial government.

Judicial appointments board for scotland

"Roosevelt's March 1937 Fireside Chat"

Judicial nominating convention

The Judicial System of the State of Deseret was the legal framework for the provisional government of the proposed State of Deseret. It existed for only two years, when it was outmoded by the newly established territory of Utah, which became an organized incorporated territory of the United States after September 9, 1850. Like its parent state, the Deseret Judicial System was never officially recognized by the United States Government.

The Judicial Commission of New South Wales is an independent statutory corporation of the New South Wales Government that provides continuing education to and examines complaints made against judicial officers in New South Wales, Australia.The commission is headed by the Chief Justice of New South Wales, presently Tom Bathurst, and consists of the heads of each of the major courts in New South Wales plus community representatives.

In Spain, a judicial district (Spanish: Partido judicial) is a territorial unit for the administration of justice, composed of one or more municipalities bordering and within the same province.Among the municipalities that make up the judicial parties, one of them, usually the largest or highest number of contentious matters occur, it is called head of judicial party. In this head is the seat of one or more courts of first instance and instruction.

Su-huat Īnn

medic

Judicial commissioner

Collegium System

Judicial District of Ica

Judicial District of Huancavelica

The Judicial Complaints Reviewer is a Scottish public ombudsman, and is responsible for reviewing the handling of complaints against the judiciary of Scotland by the Judicial Office for Scotland. The post was established in 2011 as a result of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008. The Reviewer appointed by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, with the approval of the Lord President of the Court of Session. The Reviewer's services are open to those who have complained about the conduct of a member of the judiciary, and also to members of the judiciary who have been the subject of a complaint.As of May 2017, the Judicial Complaints Reviewer was Gillian Thompson; who was appointed on 1 September 2014.

The Judicial Papyrus of Turin (also Turin legal papyrus) is an ancient Egyptian record of the trials held against conspirators plotting to assassinate Ramesses III in what is referred to as the "harem conspiracy". The papyrus contains mostly summaries of the accusations, convictions and punishments meted out.Two further papyri deal with the magical aspects of this case: the Rollin and Lee papyri describe the magic used and the punishments apportioned, which in all three cases was a death sentence.

Appellate Committee of the House of Lords

Judicial decision making

Judicial Reform

Judicial Correction Services

December 2009

Judicial Executive Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council (JELAC)

Judicial independence

Judicial remedies

administrative director

Judicial order

Judicial clothing

Hon.Gabrielle Upton MP

The Judicial District of Cono Norte is one of the 28 Judicial Districts of the Judicial System of Peru.Its main seat is in the district of Independencia in Lima and its jurisdiction extends over the Limean districts of Independencia, San Martín de Porres, Comas, Los Olivos, Puente Piedra, Ancon, Santa Rosa, and Carabayllo which make up a section of the Lima Metropolitan Area called the Cono Norte.

Judicial branch of the government of the State of Oregon

Judicial reform

高等法院

A judicial opinion is a form of legal opinion written by a judge or a judicial panel in the course of resolving a legal dispute, providing the decision reached to resolve the dispute, and usually indicating the facts which led to the dispute and an analysis of the law used to arrive at the decision.

Judicial panel on multidistrict litigation

Judicial Remedies

Judicial cognizance

Judicial districts of Peru

Judicial District of La Libertad

Judicial Service Commission (South Africa)

The judicial reform of Alexander II is generally considered one of the most successful and consistent of all his reforms (along with the military reform). A completely new court system and order of legal proceedings were established. The main results were the introduction of a unified judicial system instead of a cumbersome set of estates of the realm courts, and fundamental changes in criminal trials. The latter included the establishment of the principle of equality of the parties involved, the introduction of public hearings, the jury trial, and a professional advocate that had never existed in Russia. However, there were also problems, as certain obsolete institutions were not covered by the reform. Also, the reform was hindered by extrajudicial punishment, introduced on a widespread scale during the reigns of his successors – Alexander III and Nicholas II.The judicial reforms started on 20 November 1864, when the tsar signed the decree which enforced four Regulations (Establishment of Judicial Settlements, Regulations of Civil Proceedings, Regulations of Criminal Proceedings, and Regulations of Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace).

Judicial Review (Theory)

Judicial functions of the House of Lords

wǔyuàn

Judicial procedure

Judicial Conference of the State of New York

Judicial District of Cañete

Judicial murder is the unjustified use of capital punishment.The term was first used in 1782 (German Justizmord) by August Ludwig von Schlözer in reference to the execution of Anna Göldi.

Martin Hoshino

Judicial District of Lambayeque

Judicial Correction Services, Incorporated (Delaware) (JCS) is a privately held probation company established in 2001 and based in Georgia. Its CEO is Robert McMichael of Atlanta, GA. The company acts as a self-funding probation agency for local courts, mostly in the southeast United States. The company is part of the private "extra-carceral" or "alternatives to incarceration" industry, which includes private halfway houses, probation services and/or electronic monitoring. This industry, which includes services such as Judicial Correctional Service is "offender-funded", shifting the cost of probation onto probationers. The industry includes private extra-carceral institutions such as halfway houses, probation services and electronic monitoring. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 J.C.S. was listed by Inc.'s as "the fastest growing company in the United States. In 2011 J.C.S was acquired by Correctional Healthcare Companies. In a July 2012 case regarding the contract between Judicial Correction Services and Harpersville, Alabama, Judge Hub Harrington accused JCS of egregious abuses which were akin to "debtors' prison" and an "extortion racket" condoned by the elected officials of Harpersville in their aggressive pursuit of fines owed the Harpersville Municipal Court.If a person is sentenced to parole for committing a misdemeanor such as the inability to pay traffic fines, J.C.S ensures the probationer meets all the conditions of parole and requires the probationer to pay various fees (in addition to fines) that provide a significant profit to the firm. Persons who are unwilling or unable to pay the fine and fees or who otherwise fail to meet the conditions of parole can be jailed.J.C.S. operates in an environment where municipal courts across the United States are under considerable financial strain. By instigating the "offender-funded" initiative, that was once financed by government services, offender-funded companies save the public purse while turning a profit.Aggressive pursuit of these fines and fees can double collections in some areas. On its website, the company claims all the courts it services have increased collections.By 2009 JCS employed about 300 people and reported revenues of more than thirteen million dollars.In 2010, JCS had management issues and a restructuring of the command structure. The regional manager had numerous internal and external sexual harassment claims. That supervisor was given the option to resign only after the company received negative publicity. Numerous women were arbitrarily terminated or denied advancement in favor of guys with legit criminal records. That regional manager struck up a friendship with judge sparks and currently runs the birmingham municipal court.

Tilak Marg, New Delhi, India, 110 021

Judicial foreclosure

Judicial District of Ayacucho

Judicial Affairs and Education Committee (Iceland)

Judicial murder is the unjustified use of capital punishment.The term was first used in 1782 (German Justizmord) by August Ludwig von Schlözer in reference to the execution of Anna Göldi. In a footnote, he explains the term as"the murder of an innocent, deliberately, and with all the pomp of holy Justice, perpetrated by people installed to prevent murder, or, if a murder has occurred, to see to it that it is punished appropriately."Voltaire in 1777 used the comparable term of assassins juridiques ("judicial murderers").In 1932, the term is also used by Justice Sutherland in Powell v. Alabama when establishing the right to a court-appointed attorney in all capital cases:Let us suppose the extreme case of a prisoner charged with a capital offense who is deaf and dumb, illiterate and feeble minded, unable to employ counsel, with the whole power of the state arrayed against him, prosecuted by counsel for the state without assignment of counsel for his defense, tried, convicted and sentenced to death. Such a result ... if carried into execution, would be little short of judicial murder.Hermann Mostar (1956) defends the extension of the term to un-premeditated miscarriages of justice where an innocent suffers the death penalty.

Judicial Committee of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council

Because no one is above the law!

Judicial Discipline Process: An Overview

Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937

Judicial doctrine

In the practice of law, judicial estoppel (also known as estoppel by inconsistent positions) is an estoppel that precludes a party from taking a position in a case that is contrary to a position it has taken in earlier legal proceedings. Although, in the United States, it is only a part of common law and therefore not sharply defined, it is generally agreed that it can only be cited if the party in question successfully maintained its position in the earlier proceedings and benefited from it.Judicial estoppel is a doctrine that may apply in matters involving closed bankruptcies, wherein the former debtor attempts to lay claim to an asset that was not disclosed on the bankruptcy schedules. In an early U.S. articulation of the doctrine, the United States Supreme Court, in First National Bank of Jacksboro v. Lasater, 196 U.S. 115 (1905), held at 119:"It cannot be that a bankrupt, by omitting to schedule and withholding from his trustee all knowledge of certain property, can, after his estate in bankruptcy has been finally closed up, immediately thereafter assert title to the property on the ground that the trustee had never taken any action in respect to it. If the claim was of value (as certainly this claim was, according to the judgment below), it was something to which the creditors were entitled, and this bankrupt could not, by withholding knowledge of its existence, obtain a release from his debts and still assert title to the property."The principle was used in 2001 by a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in the Piscataqua River border dispute, in which New Hampshire argued that the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard was in New Hampshire after having previously joined a consent decree that agreed on a border that would put it in Maine.

Judicial branch of the government of Zimbabwe

Judicial disqualification

The Judicial Investigation Department (Spanish, Organismo de Investigación Judicial, OIJ), is a unit of the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica. Currently its director is Walter Espinoza.It was founded in 1973 as a subsidiary body of the Criminal Courts of Public Prosecutions in scientific discovery and verification of the crimes and their responsible. Its Organic Law stipulates that act on their own initiative, by denunciation or by order of competent authority in the investigation of crimes of public action in identifying and apprehension prevention of alleged offenders. It also aims to collect, secure and manage scientific evidence and other background needed for research. Also, the OIJ sit in the crimes of private action, in order of competent authority after receiving the claim or indictment of the party concerned. To meet the wide variety of tasks, the OIJ is structured as follows.

Judicial investigative committee

Judicial power

Sīhfǎ Yuàn

Judicial minimalist

五院
Sṳ̂-fap Yen

Judicial process

Judicial Minimalism

Judicial officers

Judicial System of Peru

Judicial commission

Judicial Commissioner

The Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission is a Canadian commission that recommends judicial salaries for federally appointed judges.The commission was created in 1999 by the government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, under the Judges Act. This was prompted by the Provincial Judges Reference (1997), an opinion by the Supreme Court of Canada, although the federal government itself was not bound by this opinion.

Judicial person

Judicial independence in Singapore

Judicial districts of Nevada

Judicial Assistance is the admittance and enforcement of a judicial order by a court from one jurisdiction to a court in another jurisdiction. Such admittance requires a treaty between the governments of the two jurisdictions. In common law jurisdictions, if a judicial assistance treaty is not in effect then the extra-jurisdictional order may be only admitted as evidence in separate litigation covering the same matter.

Judicial Commission of Pakistan

Judicial Procedures Reform Act

Judicial corruption in India

The Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that strengthened the mandatory retirement provisions previously instituted by the Judicial Pensions Act 1959 for members of the British judiciary.While the 1959 Act forbade service past age 75 by any judges appointed thereafter (Lord Denning being the last exempt jurist), the 1993 Act made the ordinary retirement age 70, and while enabling a minister (presumably the Lord Chancellor) to allow individual judges to remain in office until 75, it expressly forbids persons aged over 75 to hold any judicial post whatsoever.

In the United States, a judicial intern (also commonly known as a "judicial extern" or "extern law clerk" ) is usually a law student or sometimes a recent law school graduate who provides assistance to a judge and/or law clerks in researching and writing issues before the court.

Judicial District of Huarua

Judicial Misconduct

The Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission is a Canadian commission that recommends judicial salaries for federally appointed judges.The commission was created in 1999 by the government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, under the Judges Act. This was prompted by the Provincial Judges Reference (1997), an opinion by the Supreme Court of Canada, although the federal government itself was not bound by this opinion. The Reference had stated that independent commissions are needed to ensure salaries are free of political manipulation. This was based in the principle of judicial independence, said to be implied by the preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867. The government accepted the Reference's suggestion that such commissions are necessary and must be "Independent, objective and effective."Members have tenure for four years and make a report with recommendations every four years. This report is given to the Minister of Justice. The first commissioners were Richard Drouin, Eleanore Cronk and Fred Gorbet. Later commissionerts included Gretta Chambers.The government receives recommendations and may give reasons accepting them or rejecting parts. The government pointed to the Supreme Court's 2005 decision Provincial Court Judges' Assn. of New Brunswick v. New Brunswick (Minister of Justice) to show recommendations do not need to be followed entirely.

Judicial misconduct

Judicial Council (disambiguation)

Interpretation Act

Judicial reform of Alexander II

Judicial and Bar Council (Philippines)

ㄙ ㄈㄚˇ ㄩㄢˋ

Judicial Districts of Spain

Judicial reforms

Judicial nominating board

Judicial decisions

Judicial appointments in Canada

Judicial District of Lima

President and Chief Justice

Judicial corporal punishment in Afghanistan

Judicial proceeding

Parliament of the United Kingdom

The Supreme Court of India (Hindi: भारत का सर्वोच्च न्यायालय) is the highest judicial forum and final court of appeal of India established under Constitution of India, as per which Supreme Court is the highest constitutional court and acts as the guardian of Constitution.

Judicial corporal punishment in Afghanistan is lawful and can be carried out in public or private.

Judicial clerkship

Judicial Committee, Her Britannic Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council

Judicial Review (Law)

Judicial branch of the government of the State of Colorado

Judicial Service Commission (Somalia)

Su-hoat Īⁿ

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC; Filipino: Sangguniang Panghukuman at Pang-abogasya) of the Philippines is a constitutionally-created body that recommends appointees for vacancies that may arise in the composition of the Supreme Court, other lower courts, and the Legal Education Board, and in the offices of the Ombudsman, Deputy Ombudsman and the Special Prosecutor.

The Judicial Commission of New South Wales is an independent statutory corporation of the New South Wales Government that provides continuing education to and examines complaints made against judicial officers in New South Wales, Australia.The commission is headed by the Chief Justice of New South Wales, presently Tom Bathurst, and consists of the heads of each of the major courts in New South Wales plus community representatives. Its powers are enshrined in the Judicial Officers Act 1986 and the Commission reports to the Attorney General and Minister for Justice, presently Hon.Gabrielle Upton MP.The commission is the only body of its type in Australia. Similar bodies are in existence in Canada, India and the United States. The work of the commission is split into two distinct areas. The first is a conduct division which deals with complaints about judicial officers. The other area is the educative function, which provides information on sentencing information, legal development and ongoing training for judicial officers.The commission marked a significant change in the legal system in New South Wales. It restored public confidence in the judicial system, which had been rocked by a series of scandals and allegations of misconduct in the early 1980s. The commission eliminated the political process from the removal of a judge from public office. Judges were no longer subject to the whim of the government of the day in whether they could be removed from office. Instead, the commission now provides a means outside politics for the dispassionate consideration of misconduct by judicial officers. As one present judge has suggested, the commission has actually improved and safe-guarded independence of the courts. The model for a judicial commission has received support for introduction elsewhere in Australia.

Judicial officer

Judicial System of the State of Deseret

Judicial fiat

Judicial and Administrative Institutions Employees Union of Yugoslavia

Judicial astrology is the art of forecasting events by calculation of the planetary and stellar bodies and their relationship to the Earth.

Judicial discretion is the power of the judiciary to make some legal decisions according to their discretion. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the ability of judges to exercise discretion is an aspect of judicial independence.

Ministry of Justice

Judicial District of San Martin

Judicial council (United States federal courts)

Judicial clerk

Judicial District of Junin

Government Watchdog

In the United States, a judicial intern (also commonly known as a "judicial extern" or "extern law clerk" ) is usually a law student or sometimes a recent law school graduate who provides assistance to a judge and/or law clerks in researching and writing issues before the court. Working as a judicial intern allows law students to gain practical legal experience and familiarity with the court operations.Many judicial interns subsequently choose to work full-time as judicial law clerks immediately after graduation. These judicial "clerkships" generally last one year in which the law clerk works closely with the judge in assisting various matters before the court. Judicial clerkships tend to be a valuable experience to an attorney's career because of the work involved in both substantive and procedural issues. In many cases, a clerkship is a critical stepping stone into real practice. Most, if not all, major law firms pay "clerkship" bonuses to new associates who have completed a full one year clerkship term. Among the most prestigious judicial internships are those in the federal court of appeals, federal district courts, and in the state's supreme court.A judicial intern's selection process is similar to judicial clerkship positions. Grades, class ranking, and relevant extracurricular activities such as membership in the law school's law review or being a member of the law school's Moot Court Board are common criteria in selecting a judicial intern.The American Bar Association Section of Litigation accepts judicial internship applications annually.

The European Court of Justice has historically been an important driver of integration in the EU by performing judicial activism.

Judicial oversight

Statutory corporation

Judicial branch

Supreme Court of India

November 2016

ukpga

Judicial Review in English Law

Judicial Reorganization Bill

Judicial committee of the privy council

The Judicial Studies Center (Portuguese: Centro de Estudos Judiciários) is the Portuguese State Department which provides training for future judges and prosecutors who will perform in courts of law. It also organizes courses for current judges, prosecutors and lawyers concerning matters which are deemed useful for their activity.

Judicial branch of the government of Puerto Rico

Judicial Task force on Judicial Impeachment

Judicial corruption

Judicial Council of California

Attorney General and Minister for Justice

Judicial Intern

Judicial committee of the Privy Council

Judicial Office

Judicial equality

Judicial System of Iran

Judicial Investigation Agency

The Judicial Administration Fellowship Program is administered by the Center for California Studies at Sacramento State and co-sponsored by the California Judicial Council. It is open to all people with a college degree, including recent graduates and mid-career applicants.

Judicial branch of the United States government

Judicial Complaints Reviewer

Vice President and Justice

Judicial District of Puno

The Judicial Appointments Commission is an independent commission that selects candidates for judicial office in courts and tribunals in England and Wales and for some tribunals whose jurisdiction extends to Scotland or Northern Ireland.

In the practice of law, judicial estoppel (also known as estoppel by inconsistent positions) is an estoppel that precludes a party from taking a position in a case that is contrary to a position it has taken in earlier legal proceedings.

Judicial Review in the United States

Judicial panel

The Judicial Complaints Reviewer is a Scottish public ombudsman, and is responsible for reviewing the handling of complaints against the judiciary of Scotland by the Judicial Office for Scotland. The post was established in 2011 as a result of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008. The Reviewer appointed by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, with the approval of the Lord President of the Court of Session.

Judicial intern

Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee

Judicial Review

Judicial District of Piura

Judicial biographies

Judicial interim release

Judicial minimalism

Judicial nominating committee

The Judicial Administration Fellowship Program is administered by the Center for California Studies at Sacramento State and co-sponsored by the California Judicial Council. It is open to all people with a college degree, including recent graduates and mid-career applicants. It is expected that applicants will demonstrate an interest in the judicial system and issues concerning the administration of justice in California courts.Ten fellows are accepted into the 11-month program which begins in September. The fellowship program is both academic and professional. Upon acceptance into the program, fellows will be enrolled as graduate students in Public Administration at Sacramento State, and attend regularly scheduled academic seminars. Fellows serve as full-time professional staff in Judicial branch offices.Field assignments will include the Sacramento, San Francisco and Los Angeles offices of the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Judicial Council Office of Governmental Affairs, and county appellate or trial courts.Fellows are paid a monthly stipend of US$1,972 and receive health, dental and vision benefits.

Judicial Investigation Department

Judicial branch of the People's Republic of China

Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter.

Judicial District of Ucayali

The Judicial Yuan (Chinese: 司法院; pinyin: Sīfǎ Yuàn; Wade–Giles: Szu1-fa3 Yüan4; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Su-hoat Īⁿ) is one of the five branches (五院; wǔyuàn) of government in the Republic of China (Taiwan) stipulated by the Constitution of the Republic of China, which follows Sun Yat-sen's Three Principles of the People, and serves as the highest judicial organ in the Republic of China.

Judicial Power of Peru

The Judicial Yuan (Chinese: 司法院; pinyin: Sīfǎ Yuàn; Wade–Giles: Szu1-fa3 Yüan4; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Su-hoat Īⁿ) is one of the five branches (五院; wǔyuàn) of government in the Republic of China (Taiwan) stipulated by the Constitution of the Republic of China, which follows Sun Yat-sen's Three Principles of the People, and serves as the highest judicial organ in the Republic of China. Its Justices of the Constitutional Court (大法官會議, literally ‘Council of Grand Justices’), with 15 members, is charged with interpreting the Constitution. The President and Vice President of the Judicial Yuan are chosen from among the Honorable Justices by the President. Eight of the grand justices, including the president and vice president of the Judicial Yuan, serve four-year terms, and the remaining Honorable Justices serve eight-year terms.The Judicial Yuan also supervises the lower courts, which consist of the Supreme Court, the high courts, district courts, the Administrative Court, and the Commission on the Disciplinary Sanctions of Public Functionaries.According to Articles 77 and 78 of the Constitution of the Republic of China, Article 5 of the Additional Articles of the Constitution, Articles 30, 43, and 75 of the Local Government Systems Act, the major functions of the Judicial Yuan are as follows:To interpret the Constitution and to unify the interpretation of laws and orders;To impeach the President and the Vice President of the Republic and to adjudicate cases concerning the dissolution of political parties that violate the Constitution;To adjudicate civil and criminal cases;To adjudicate administrative cases;To adjudicate cases concerning disciplinary measures with respect to public functionaries; andTo interpret whether local self-government ordinances and matters conflict with national laws or the Constitution.Judicial Administrative Power of the Constitutional Court.

The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML or the Panel) is a special body within the United States federal court system which manages multidistrict litigation. It was established by Congress in 1968 under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, and has the authority to determine whether civil actions pending in two or more federal judicial districts should be transferred to a single federal district court for pretrial proceedings.

Judicial oath

The House of Lords, in addition to having a legislative function, historically also had a judicial function. It functioned as a court of first instance for the trials of peers, for impeachment cases, and as a court of last resort within the United Kingdom. In the latter case the House's jurisdiction was essentially limited to the hearing of appeals from the lower courts. Appeals were technically not to the House of Lords, but rather to the Queen-in-Parliament.

The Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 (frequently called the "court-packing plan") was a legislative initiative proposed by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt to add more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. Roosevelt's purpose was to obtain favorable rulings regarding New Deal legislation that the court had ruled unconstitutional. The central provision of the bill would have granted the President power to appoint an additional Justice to the U.S.

The Judicial Papyrus of Turin (also Turin legal papyrus) is an ancient Egyptian record of the trials held against conspirators plotting to assassinate Ramesses III in what is referred to as the "harem conspiracy".

Judicial Service Commission (disambiguation)

Judicial Clerk

Judicial Marshal

The Judicial Circuits Act of 1866 (ch. 210, 14 Stat. 209) reorganized the United States circuit courts and provided for the gradual elimination of several seats on the Supreme Court of the United States. It was signed into law on July 23, 1866, by President Andrew Johnson. It denied him the opportunity of appointing any justices to the Supreme Court. It was the first major legislation dealing with the judiciary following the American Civil War.The Act redrew the boundaries of the judicial circuits and reduced the number of circuits from ten to nine. It also provided for the gradual reduction in the number of seats on the Supreme Court from the ten that had been authorized in 1863 to seven and established in large measure the geographical outlines of the circuits ever since. Although Congress increased the size of the Supreme Court just three years later with the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, the geographical outline of the circuits has only been altered by the addition of new states to circuits and the division of two large circuits in the twentieth century.After establishing nine circuits in 1837, Congress in 1842 shifted several southern states in order to accommodate transportation routes used by the justices when traveling on circuit. In 1862 Congress incorporated five additional states into a restructured system of nine circuits, and within another year had abolished the California Circuit, placed California and Oregon in a Tenth Circuit, and reorganized the mid-western states. The 1866 Act ended a period in which the arrangement of the states into circuits was frequently reorganized.The geographical reorganization of the circuits in 1866 coincided with the broader effort of the Republican majority in Congress to reduce what it considered the disproportionate influence the southern states enjoyed before the Civil War. Between 1837 and 1862, five of the nine circuits comprised exclusively slave states. The tradition of appointing a justice from each circuit allowed Southern slaveowners to dominate the Supreme Court. After reducing the number of all-southern circuits in 1862, Congress in 1866 left only two circuits that comprised only former slave states, and only one that comprised only former Confederate states.The reduction in the size of the Supreme Court nullified the pending nomination of Henry Stanbery to the tenth seat on the Court and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing a justice during the remainder of his term. The legislation owed less to the Republican opposition and to Johnson, who signed the act, than to the efforts of Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase. The first draft of the bill proposed a return to nine justices, thus preventing tie votes on the Court and providing a justice for each circuit. In private communication with influential members of Congress and fellow justices, Chase urged a further reduction in the number of seats in hopes of winning approval for an increase in the justices' salaries. Congress did not approve an increase in judicial salaries until 1871, after it had returned the size of the Court to nine seats.

chair

A judicial panel is a set of judges who sit together to hear a cause of action, most frequently an appeal from a ruling of a trial court judge. Panels are used in contrast to single-judge appeals, and en banc hearings, which involves all of the judges of that court. Most national supreme courts sit as panels.In the United States, most federal appellate cases are heard by three-judge panels. The governing statute, 28 U.S.C. § 46(c), provides:Cases and controversies shall be heard and determined by a court or panel of not more than three judges (except that the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit may sit in panels of more than three judges if its rules so provide), unless a hearing or rehearing before the court en banc is ordered by a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit who are in regular active service.Most trials in the United States District Courts are held before a single judge, but there are some circumstances where the trial itself is required to be held before a three judge panel. For example, 28 U. S. C. § 2284(a) states:A district court of three judges shall be convened when otherwise required by Act of Congress, or when an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts or the apportionment of any statewide legislative body.Until 1976, three-judge panels heard lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of state and federal statutes, but this practice has largely ended, the major exceptions being apportionment and redistricting cases.Typically, if the chief judge is a member of the panel, that person will chair the panel and call hearings to order; if the chief judge is not on the panel, this duty falls to the senior-most judge. Following oral arguments, the judges will meet briefly to confer and determine what the likely majority opinion in the case will be. If the judge who chairs the panel is in the majority at this time, that judge may assign the writing of the opinion for that case.Some bodies, such as the British leasehold valuation tribunal, may have judicial functions carried out by a single member. Although most cases consists of a panel of three; one with a background in property law (generally a solicitor); one with a background in property valuation generally a qualified surveyor; and a layman.

Judicial discretion

Judicial Council (United States Circuit Courts)

Judicial capital

Judicial Administration Fellowship

Judicial District of Cono Norte

Judicial Arrondissement of Eupen

Judicial District of Mississippi

Judicial duels

Judicial murder

Judicial System of the USA

Judicial Committee, Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council

Judicial General Council of Mongolia

Judicial autonomy

Judicial restraint

Judicial District of Ancash

Judicial District of Huanuco/Pasco

The Judicial General Council of Mongolia (Mongolian: Монгол Улсын Шүүхийн Ерөнхий Зөвлөл, Mongol Ulsyn Shüükhiin Yerönkhii Zövlöl) is an organ of the Mongolian judiciary mandated by the Constitution of Mongolia to maintain the independence of the judiciary, represent the Mongolian judiciary and advise on the selection and removal of judicial officers.

A judicial panel is a set of judges who sit together to hear a cause of action, most frequently an appeal from a ruling of a trial court judge. Panels are used in contrast to single-judge appeals, and en banc hearings, which involves all of the judges of that court. Most national supreme courts sit as panels.In the United States, most federal appellate cases are heard by three-judge panels. The governing statute, 28 U.S.C.

Judiciary and Courts Act 2008

Judicial estoppel

Gāoděng Fǎyuàn

The Judicial and Administrative Institutions Employees Union of Yugoslavia was a trade union in Yugoslavia, which organized employees at the courts, the ministries of Justice, Interior and Foreign Affairs, the AVNOJ bureau and similar institutions. The union was founded in Belgrade in January 1945. In the autumn of 1946, the union merged with the Economic-Administrative and Technical Institutions Employees Union, forming the State Administrative and Judicial Institutions Employees Union.

Judicial accountability

Judicial offices in Scotland

Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act

Judicial Service Commission (Kenya)

Judicial Correction Services, Incorporated (Delaware) (JCS) is a privately held probation company established in 2001 and based in Georgia. Its CEO is Robert McMichael of Atlanta, GA. The company acts as a self-funding probation agency for local courts, mostly in the southeast United States. The company is part of the private "extra-carceral" or "alternatives to incarceration" industry, which includes private halfway houses, probation services and/or electronic monitoring.

The Judicial Conference of the State of New York is an institution of the New York State Unified Court System responsible for surveying current practice in the administration of the state's courts, compiling statistics, and suggesting legislation and regulations. Its members include the Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals and judges from the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division.

Judicial circuit

Chosen name recommended to PM by a selection commission.

Judicial and Legal system of Finland

Judicial District of Amazonas

California Judicial Council seal.png

Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct.Actions that can be classified as judicial misconduct include: conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts (as an extreme example: "falsification of facts" at summary judgment); using the judge's office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives; accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office; having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case; treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; violating other specific, mandatory standards of judicial conduct, such as judicial rules of procedure or evidence, or those pertaining to restrictions on outside income and requirements for financial disclosure; and acting outside the jurisdiction of the court, or performance of official duties if the conduct might have a prejudicial effect on the administration of the business of the courts among reasonable people.

The Judicial District of Lima is one of the 28 Judicial Districts of the Judicial System of Peru.Its main seat is in the city of Lima and its jurisdiction extends to 35 of the 43 Districts of Lima. The remaining eight districts (Independencia, San Martín de Porres, Comas, Los Olivos, Puente Piedra, Ancón, Santa Rosa, and Carabayllo) are under jurisdiction of the Judicial District of Cono Norte. Its jurisdiction not only covers part of the Lima Province but also the Huarochirí Province in the Lima Region.It was created by the decree of August 4, 1824 and was established December 22, 1824 under the presidency of Simón Bolívar. It is the Judicial District with the most operations in the whole nation.

Ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice

Judicial expert

Judicial Appointments Commission

chairman

AU-NSW

Judicial Immunity

Judicial caning

Judicial District of Callao

Judicial body

Judicial remedy

Judicial corporal punishment in the United States

Subordinate Courts Act

Judicial decision

Sīfǎ Yuàn

Judicial council (United States)

Judicial recount

Judicial Selection Committee (Israel)

Judicial Investigative Committee

Judicial District of Santa

Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned.

Judicial punishment

Zuìgāo Fǎyuàn

Judicial Office for Scotland

Judicial Security Division

Judicial law making

Judicial appeals

Judicial districts of Quebec

地方法院

Judicial Assistance

Presidential nomination with Legislative Yuan confirmation

The Judicial Circuits Act of 1866 (ch. 210, 14 Stat. 209) reorganized the United States circuit courts and provided for the gradual elimination of several seats on the Supreme Court of the United States. It was signed into law on July 23, 1866, by President Andrew Johnson. It denied him the opportunity of appointing any justices to the Supreme Court.

The Judicial District of Cono Norte is one of the 28 Judicial Districts of the Judicial System of Peru.Its main seat is in the district of Independencia in Lima and its jurisdiction extends over the Limean districts of Independencia, San Martín de Porres, Comas, Los Olivos, Puente Piedra, Ancon, Santa Rosa, and Carabayllo which make up a section of the Lima Metropolitan Area called the Cono Norte. Also included under the jurisdiction of this Judicial District is the Canta Province of the Lima Region.It was created by the Law Nº 25680 and was established on May 26, 1993 under the presidency of Alberto Fujimori.

Judicial court system of Denmark

Constitution

Judicial Commission of Indonesia

Judicial council (United States courts of appeals)

Judicial assistance