1.
Court
–
Similarly, the rights of those accused of a crime include the right to present a defense before a court. The system of courts that interprets and applies the law is known as the judiciary. The place where a court sits is known as a venue, the practical authority given to the court is known as its jurisdiction – the courts power to decide certain kinds of questions or petitions put to it. It is also usual in the courts to have barristers, and attorneys or counsel, as assistants, though, often, courts consist of additional barristers, bailiffs, reporters. The term the court is used to refer to the presiding officer or officials. The judge or panel of judges may also be referred to as the bench. In the United States, and other common law jurisdictions, the court by law is used to describe the judge himself or herself. In the United States, the authority of a court to take action is based on personal jurisdiction, subject-matter jurisdiction. The English word court is a cognate of the Latin word hortus, the verb to court, meaning to win favor, derives from the same source since people traveled to the sovereigns court to win his favor. The word jurisdiction comes from juris and dictio, jurisdiction is defined as the official authority to make legal decisions and judgements over an individual or materialistic item within a territory. Whether a given court has jurisdiction to preside over a case is a key question in any legal action. Three basic components of jurisdiction are jurisdiction over the person (personal jurisdiction, jurisdiction over the subject matter or thing. Other concepts of jurisdiction include general jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction, appellate jurisdiction, trial courts are courts that hold trials. Sometimes termed courts of first instance, trial courts have varying original jurisdiction, trial courts may conduct trials with juries as the finders of fact or trials in which judges act as both finders of fact and finders of law. Juries are less common in court systems outside the Anglo-American common law tradition, appellate courts are courts that hear appeals of lower courts and trial courts. Some courts, such as the Crown Court in England and Wales may have both trial and appellate jurisdictions, the two major legal traditions of the western world are the civil law courts and the common law courts. These two great legal traditions are similar, in that they are products of western culture although there are significant differences between the two traditions, civil law courts are profoundly based upon Roman Law, specifically a civil body of law entitled Corpus iuris civilis. Civil law is firmly ensconced in the French and German legal systems, Common law courts were established by English royal judges of the Kings Council after the Norman Invasion of Britain in 1066
2.
Appeal
–
In law, an appeal is the process in which cases are reviewed, where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction as well as a process of clarifying and interpreting law, although appellate courts have existed for thousands of years, common law countries did not incorporate an affirmative right to appeal into their jurisprudence until the 19th century. Appellate courts and other systems of error correction have existed for many millennia, during the first dynasty of Babylon, Hammurabi and his governors served as the highest appellate courts of the land. Ancient Roman law employed a complex hierarchy of courts, where some appeals would be heard by the emperor. Additionally, appellate courts have existed in Japan since at least the Kamakura Shogunate, during this time, the Shogunate established hikitsuke, a high appellate court to aid the state in adjudicating lawsuits. Although some scholars argue that the right to appeal is itself a substantive liberty interest, in fact, commentators have observed that common law jurisdictions were particularly slow to incorporate a right to appeal into either its civil or criminal jurisprudence. Two years later, the right to appeals was extended to criminal cases. Some states, such as Minnesota, still do not formally recognize a right to criminal appeals, although some courts permit appeals at preliminary stages of litigation, most litigants appeal final orders and judgments from lower courts. A fundamental premise of many legal systems is that appellate courts review questions of law de novo, instead, appellate courts will generally defer to the record established by the trial court, unless some error occurred during the fact-finding process. Many jurisdictions provide a statutory or constitutional right for litigants to appeal adverse decisions, however, most jurisdictions also recognize that this right may be waived. In the United States, for example, litigants may waive the right to appeal, as long as the waiver is “considered, unlike trials, appeals are generally presented to a judge, or a panel of judges, rather than a jury. Before making any formal argument, parties will generally submit legal briefs in which the present their arguments. Appellate courts may grant permission for an amicus curiae to submit a brief in support of a particular party or position. After submitting briefs, parties often have the opportunity to present an argument to a judge or panel of judges. During oral arguments, judges often ask question to attorneys to challenge their arguments or to advance their own legal theories, after deliberating in chambers, appellate courts will issue formal opinions that resolve the legal issues presented for review. When considering cases on appeal, appellate courts generally affirm, reverse, some courts maintain a dual function, where they consider both appeals as well as matters of first instance. For example, the Supreme Court of the United States primarily hears cases on appeal, some jurisdictions maintain a system of intermediate appellate courts, which are subject to the review of higher appellate courts. The highest appellate court in a jurisdiction is referred to as a court of last resort
3.
Tribunal
–
A tribunal, generally, is any person or institution with authority to judge, adjudicate on, or determine claims or disputes—whether or not it is called a tribunal in its title. For example, an advocate who appears before a court with a judge could describe that judge as their tribunal. Many governmental bodies that are titled tribunals are so described to emphasize that they are not courts of normal jurisdiction, private judicial bodies are also often styled tribunals. However, he word tribunal is not conclusive of a bodys function–for example, in Great Britain, the term is derived from the tribunes, magistrates of the Classical Roman Republic. Tribunal originally referred to the office of the tribunes, and the term is sometimes used in this sense in historical writings. In the Republic of Ireland, tribunal refers to a public inquiry established under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act 1921. The main difference between a Parliamentary Inquiry and a Tribunal of Inquiry in Ireland is that non-statutory inquiries are not vested with the powers, privileges, Tribunals are established by resolution of the Houses of the Oireachtas to enquire into matters of urgent public importance. It is not a function of Tribunals to administer justice, their work is solely inquisitorial, Tribunals are obliged to report their findings to the Oireachtas. They have the power to enforce the attendance and examination of witnesses, Tribunals can consist of one or more people. A layperson, or non-lawyer, may be the Sole member of a tribunal, the tribunal system of the United Kingdom is part of the national system of administrative justice. Such a tribunal was called a Vierschaar, so called for the dimensions of the sitting judges. Most towns had the Vierschaar privilege to hear their own disputes, the Vierschaar was usually located in the town hall, and many historic town halls still have such a room, usually decorated with scenes from the Judgment of Solomon. The following tribunals exist within the Judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the Peoples Republic of China, Lands, Small Claims, Labour, for public inquiries, commissions are set up instead, under the Commissions of Inquiry Ordinance. In many cases, the rules of evidence which apply in courts do not apply in tribunals. Appeal from a tribunal is to a court, in the context of sport, tribunal frequently refers to the AFL Tribunal, the disciplinary body of the Australian Football League. Tribunal is used in the U. S. generally to refer to courts or judicial bodies, in Bangladesh, tribunal refers to a court that serves some special purpose—of which Bangladesh have several. These have been set up to ensure speedy trial and reduce congestion in the normal courts. Beside this, Article 117 of the Constitution Of The Peoples Republic of Bangladesh empowers the parliament to set up one or more administrative tribunals, no court can entertain any proceeding or make any order in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of such tribunal
4.
Jurisdiction
–
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a legal body to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility, e. g. Michigan tax law. In federations like the U. S. areas of jurisdiction apply to local, state, colloquially it is used to refer to the geographical area to which such authority applies, e. g. the court has jurisdiction over all of Colorado. The legal term refers only to the authority, not to a geographical area. International laws and treaties provide agreements which nations agree to be bound to, supranational organizations provide mechanisms whereby disputes between nations may be resolved through arbitration or mediation. When a country is recognized as de jure, it is an acknowledgment by the de jure nations that the country has sovereignty. However, it is often at the discretion of each nation whether to co-operate or participate, if a nation does agree to participate in activities of the supranational bodies and accept decisions, the nation is giving up its sovereign authority and thereby allocating power to these bodies. The fact that organizations, courts and tribunals have been created raises the difficult question of how to co-ordinate their activities with those of national courts. But, to invoke the jurisdiction in any case, all the parties have to accept the prospective judgment as binding. This reduces the risk of wasting the Courts time, each such group may form transnational institutions with declared legislative or judicial powers. For example, in Europe, the European Court of Justice has been given jurisdiction as the appellate court to the member states on issues of European law. This jurisdiction is entrenched and its authority could only be denied by a member if that member nation asserts its sovereignty. Hence, in the Netherlands, all treaties and the orders of international organizations are effective without any action being required to convert international into municipal law, in nations adopting this theory, the local courts automatically accept jurisdiction to adjudicate on lawsuits relying on international law principles. Otherwise the courts have a discretion to apply international law where it does not conflict with statute or the common law. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the treaty power authorizes Congress to legislate under the Necessary and this concerns the relationships both between courts in different jurisdictions, and between courts within the same jurisdiction. The usual legal doctrine under which questions of jurisdiction are decided is termed forum non conveniens, to deal with the issue of forum shopping, nations are urged to adopt more positive rules on conflict of laws. In addition, the Lugano Convention binds the European Union and the European Free Trade Association, council Regulation 44/2001 now also applies as between the rest of the EU Member States and Denmark due to an agreement reached between the European Community and Denmark. In some legal areas, at least, the CACA enforcement of judgments is now more straightforward. At a national level, the rules still determine jurisdiction over persons who are not domiciled or habitually resident in the European Union or the Lugano area
5.
Court of Appeal of New Zealand
–
The Court of Appeal of New Zealand, located in Wellington, is New Zealand’s principal intermediate appellate court. It is also the appellate court for a number of matters. In practice, most appeals are resolved at this intermediate appellate level, the Court of Appeal has existed as a separate court since 1862 but, until 1957, it was composed of Judges of the High Court sitting periodically in panels. In 1957 the Court of Appeal was reconstituted as a permanent court separate from the High Court, the President and nine other permanent appellate Judges constitute the full-time working membership of the Court. The Court sits in panels of five Judges and three Judges depending on the nature and wider significance of the particular case, a considerable number of three-Judge cases are heard by Divisional Courts consisting of one permanent Court of Appeal Judge and two High Court Judges seconded for that purpose. In the main, criminal appeals will be allocated to a Divisional Court unless the President otherwise directs and this recognises the insights which Judges with current trial experience bring to criminal appeals. Counsel for the appellant or respondent may request a direction that a particular appeal be allocated to a Permanent Court or a Full Court. Longer civil appeals or areas that raise issues of public significance will usually be allocated to a Permanent Court. Again counsel for the appellant or respondent may request a direction that a particular appeal be allocated to a Divisional Court, the Prime Minister will also determine whether an appeal is of sufficient significance to warrant the consideration of a Full Court of five members. The President will, where appropriate, consult with other permanent Judges, such a decision typically is made only once or twice a year. How cases come to the court The Court of Appeal deals with civil and criminal appeals from matters heard in the High Court, and serious criminal charges from the District Court. Matters appealed to the High Court from the District Court and certain tribunals can be taken to the Court of Appeal with leave, the Court may also grant leave to hear appeals against pre-trial rulings in criminal cases, and appeals on questions of law from the Employment Court. Civil Proceedings The Court of Appeal Rules 2005 set out the requirements for pursuing civil appeals. The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from any judgment, appeals on questions of law from the Employment Court can, with the leave of the Court of Appeal, be brought to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear appeals against pre-trial rulings in criminal cases, there is a right of appeal with respect to High Court decisions granting or refusing bail or in respect of conditions of bail. The Court of Appeal Rules 2001 set out the requirements for pursuing criminal appeals in the Court of Appeal. The Crimes Act 1961 and Criminal Procedure Act 2011 also contain both substantive and procedural provisions relevant to criminal appeals to the Court of Appeal. If the appellant is in custody he or she is not entitled to be present at a hearing involving oral submissions unless there is a right to be present
6.
Wellington
–
Wellington is the capital and second most populous urban area of New Zealand, with 405,000 residents. It is at the tip of the North Island, between Cook Strait and the Rimutaka Range. Wellington is the population centre of the southern North Island and is the administrative centre of the Wellington Region. It is the worlds windiest city, with a wind speed of over 26 km/h. Situated near the centre of the country, Wellington was well placed for trade. In 1839 it was chosen as the first major planned settlement for British immigrants coming to New Zealand, the settlement was named in honour of the Arthur Wellesley, the first Duke of Wellington and victor of the Battle of Waterloo. As the nations capital since 1865, the New Zealand Government and Parliament, Supreme Court, despite being much smaller than Auckland, Wellington is also referred to as New Zealands cultural capital. The city is home to the National Archives, the National Library, architectural sights include the Government Building—one of the largest wooden buildings in the world—as well as the iconic Beehive. Wellington plays host to artistic and cultural organisations, including the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. It has an urban culture, with many cafés, restaurants. One of the worlds most liveable cities, the 2014 Mercer Quality of Living Survey ranked Wellington 12th in the world, Wellingtons economy is primarily service-based, with an emphasis on finance, business services, and government. It is the centre of New Zealands film and special effects industries, Wellington ranks as one of New Zealands chief seaports and serves both domestic and international shipping. The city is served by Wellington International Airport, the third busiest airport in the country, Wellingtons transport network includes train and bus lines which reach as far as the Kapiti Coast and Wairarapa, and ferries connect the city to the South Island. Wellington takes its name from Arthur Wellesley, the first Duke of Wellington and victor of the Battle of Waterloo, his title comes from the town of Wellington in the English county of Somerset. One of the founders of the settlement, Edward Jerningham Wakefield, reported that the settlers took up the views of the directors with great cordiality, in Māori, Wellington has three names. In New Zealand Sign Language, the name is signed by raising the index, middle and ring fingers of one hand, palm forward, to form a W, and shaking it slightly from side to side twice. The citys location close to the mouth of the narrow Cook Strait leads to its vulnerability to strong gales, legends recount that Kupe discovered and explored the district in about the 10th century. The earliest date with hard evidence for Maori living in New Zealand is about 1280, European settlement began with the arrival of an advance party of the New Zealand Company on the ship Tory on 20 September 1839, followed by 150 settlers on the Aurora on 22 January 1840
7.
Supreme Court of New Zealand
–
The Supreme Court of New Zealand is the highest court and the court of last resort in New Zealand, having formally come into existence on 1 January 2004. The court sat for the first time on 1 July 2004 and it replaced the right of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, based in London. It was created with the passing of the Supreme Court Act 2003, at the time, the creation of the Supreme Court and the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council were controversial constitutional changes in New Zealand. It should not be confused with New Zealands old Supreme Court, the name was changed in anticipation of the eventual creation of a final court of appeal for New Zealand that would be called the Supreme Court. The inaugural bench were the most senior judges of the New Zealand Court of Appeal at the time and their appointment to the new Court was said to have been based on seniority and merit. The maximum bench under statute is six judges, several acting Judges have also been appointed to sit whenever a permanent judge was unable to do so due to illness or a conflict of interest. Acting judges only sit on substantive appeals, and not applications for leave, on 4 May 2005, Attorney General Michael Cullen announced the appointment of Justice Sir John McGrath of the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court bench as its sixth permanent judge. On 21 February 2006, the Honourable Sir Noel Anderson was appointed to the Supreme Court, thus the promotion of the most senior Court of Appeal member has continued. This practice was broken with the appointment of Justice Bill Wilson in December 2007 after having served less than a year as a judge of the Court of Appeal, in the early 1980s, Minister of Justice Jim McLay suggested their abolition. Proposals for an indigenous final appellate court can be traced back to 1985, in 1996, Paul East, Attorney-General of the Bolger government, proposed to end the status of the Privy Council as the countrys highest court of appeal. The proposal got as far as a Bill being introduced into Parliament, however, this Bill met with little support from within the National Party, and the Bill was not carried over by the next Parliament following the 1996 general election. The policy was resurrected in 1999 by the Fifth Labour Government of 1999 –2008, a discussion paper, Reshaping New Zealands Appeal Structure attracted 70 submissions. A year later a Ministerial Action Group was formed to assist Ministers in designing the purpose, structure, the Groups report, Replacing the Privy Council, A New Supreme Court was published in April 2002, before the general election a few months later. A Campaign for the Privy Council was established to lobby against the abolition of appeals, many business and community groups joined the opposition to the ending of appeals. Notable supporters of the Supreme Court were former Privy Councillor Lord Cooke of Thorndon and former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the Monarchist League complained the majority of members of the select committee were motivated by a republican agenda. It received Royal Assent on 17 October 2003, with commencement on 1 January 2004, in 2008, National leader John Key ruled out any abolition of the Supreme Court and return to the Privy Council. The petition failed to gain the 310,000 signatures of registered electors needed and lapsed on 2 July 2004 and these concerns were because the entire bench was to be appointed simultaneously, and no clear statement had been made about how they would be selected. However, the level of concern was considerably lessened when Wilson announced that the appointments would be based on merit, appointments to the Court were expected and unsurprising
8.
Colombo
–
Colombo is the commercial capital and largest city of Sri Lanka. According to the Brookings Institution, Colombo metropolitan area has a population of 5.6 million and it is the financial centre of the island and a popular tourist destination. It is located on the west coast of the island and adjacent to Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte, Colombo is often referred to as the capital since Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte is within the urban area of, and a satellite city of, Colombo. It is also the capital of Western Province, Sri Lanka. Colombo is a busy and vibrant place with a mixture of life and colonial buildings. It was the capital of Sri Lanka until 1982. Due to its harbour and its strategic position along the East-West sea trade routes. It was made the capital of the island when Sri Lanka was ceded to the British Empire in 1815, in 1978, when administrative functions were moved to Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte, Colombo was designated as the commercial capital of Sri Lanka. The main city is home to a majority of Sri Lankas corporate offices, restaurants, the name Colombo, first introduced by the Portuguese in 1505, is believed to be derived from the classical Sinhalese name කොලොන් තොට Kolon thota, meaning port on the river Kelani. Another belief is that the name is derived from the Sinhalese name කොල-අඹ-තොට Kola-amba-thota which means Harbour with leafy mango trees, the author of the oldest Sinhalese grammar, Sidatsangarava, written in the 13th century wrote about a category of words that exclusively belonged to early Sinhalese. It lists naramba and kolamba as belonging to an indigenous source, kolamba may also be the source of the name of the commercial capital Colombo. As Colombo possesses a harbour, it was known to Indian, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Arabs. Traveller Ibn Batuta who visited the island in the 14th century and their descendants now comprise the local Sri Lankan Moor community. Portuguese explorers led by Dom Lourenço de Almeida first arrived in Sri Lanka in 1505, as part of the treaty, the Portuguese were given full authority over the coastline in exchange for the promise of guarding the coast against invaders. They were allowed to establish a trading post in Colombo, within a short time, however, they expelled the Muslim inhabitants of Colombo and began to build a fort in 1517. Following the fall of the kingdom in 1593, the Portuguese were able to complete control over the coastal area. This part of Colombo is still known as Fort and houses the presidential palace, the area immediately outside Fort is known as Pettah and is a commercial hub. In 1638 the Dutch signed a treaty with King Rajasinha II of Kandy which assured the king assistance in his war against the Portuguese in exchange for a monopoly of the major trade goods
9.
Judiciary of Sri Lanka
–
The judiciary of Sri Lanka is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in Sri Lanka. It is set out in Constitution, which defines courts as independent institutions within the framework of checks. Sri Lanka has a system which is an amalgam of English common law, Roman-Dutch civil law. The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka is the highest judicial instance and it is composed of the Chief Justice and not less than six and not more than ten Puisne Justices. Judges are appointed by the President with the nomination of the Parliamentary Council, the Supreme Court is the final appellate Court and has jurisdiction in constitutional matters. The Court of Appeal hears all appeals from the High Court, the court is composed of the President of the Court and not less than six and not more than eleven other Judges. The High Court has jurisdiction in criminal matters, the district courts in civil matters. The Sri Lankan Government has stated that it has no intention of joining the International Criminal Court, Government of Sri Lanka Law of Sri Lanka Ministry of Justice
10.
Supreme Court of the United States
–
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest federal court of the United States. In the legal system of the United States, the Supreme Court is the interpreter of federal constitutional law. The Court normally consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight justices who are nominated by the President. Once appointed, justices have life tenure unless they resign, retire, in modern discourse, the justices are often categorized as having conservative, moderate, or liberal philosophies of law and of judicial interpretation. Each justice has one vote, and while many cases are decided unanimously, the Court meets in the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D. C. The Supreme Court is sometimes referred to as SCOTUS, in analogy to other acronyms such as POTUS. The ratification of the United States Constitution established the Supreme Court in 1789 and its powers are detailed in Article Three of the Constitution. The Supreme Court is the court specifically established by the Constitution. The Court first convened on February 2,1790, by which five of its six initial positions had been filled. According to historian Fergus Bordewich, in its first session, he Supreme Court convened for the first time at the Royal Exchange Building on Broad Street and they had no cases to consider. After a week of inactivity, they adjourned until September, the sixth member was not confirmed until May 12,1790. Because the full Court had only six members, every decision that it made by a majority was made by two-thirds. However, Congress has always allowed less than the Courts full membership to make decisions, under Chief Justices Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth, the Court heard few cases, its first decision was West v. Barnes, a case involving a procedural issue. The Courts power and prestige grew substantially during the Marshall Court, the Marshall Court also ended the practice of each justice issuing his opinion seriatim, a remnant of British tradition, and instead issuing a single majority opinion. Also during Marshalls tenure, although beyond the Courts control, the impeachment, the Taney Court made several important rulings, such as Sheldon v. Nevertheless, it is primarily remembered for its ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, which helped precipitate the Civil War. In the Reconstruction era, the Chase, Waite, and Fuller Courts interpreted the new Civil War amendments to the Constitution, during World War II, the Court continued to favor government power, upholding the internment of Japanese citizens and the mandatory pledge of allegiance. Nevertheless, Gobitis was soon repudiated, and the Steel Seizure Case restricted the pro-government trend, the Warren Court dramatically expanded the force of Constitutional civil liberties. It held that segregation in public schools violates equal protection and that traditional legislative district boundaries violated the right to vote
11.
United States courts of appeals
–
The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal court system. A court of appeals decides appeals from the courts within its federal judicial circuit. The United States courts of appeals are considered among the most powerful, because of their ability to set legal precedent in regions that cover millions of Americans, the United States courts of appeals have strong policy influence on U. S. law. The Ninth Circuit in particular is influential, covering 20% of the American population. There are currently 179 judges on the U. S. courts of appeals authorized by Congress in 28 U. S. C. §43 pursuant to Article III of the U. S. Constitution. These judges are nominated by the President of the United States and they have lifetime tenure, earning an annual salary of $215,400. The eleven numbered circuits and the D. C. Circuit are geographically defined, the thirteenth court of appeals is the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has nationwide jurisdiction over certain appeals based on their subject matter. All of the courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative decisions and rulemaking. Decisions of the U. S. courts of appeals have been published by the private company West Publishing in the Federal Reporter series since the courts were established, only decisions that the courts designate for publication are included. The unpublished opinions are published separately in Wests Federal Appendix, more recently, court decisions have also been made available electronically on official court websites. However, there are also a few federal court decisions that are classified for security reasons. The number of judges that the U. S. Congress has authorized for each circuit is set forth by law in 28 U. S. C. §44, while the places where those judges must regularly sit to hear appeals are prescribed in 28 U. S. C, the current courts of appeals system was established in the Judiciary Act of 1891, also known as the Evarts Act. Because the courts of appeals possess only appellate jurisdiction, they do not hold trials, instead, appeals courts review decisions of trial courts for errors of law. Accordingly, a court considers only the record from the trial court. These arguments, which are presented in form and can range in length from dozens to hundreds of pages, are known as briefs. Sometimes lawyers are permitted to add to their written briefs with oral arguments before the appeals judges, at such hearings, only the parties lawyers speak to the court. The rules that govern the procedure in the courts of appeals are the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, in a court of appeals, an appeal is almost always heard by a panel of three judges who are randomly selected from the available judges
12.
Connecticut Supreme Court
–
The Connecticut Supreme Court, formerly known as the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors, is the highest court in the U. S. state of Connecticut. It consists of a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices, the seven justices sit in Hartford, across the street from the Connecticut State Capitol. It generally holds eight sessions of two to three weeks per year, with one session each September through November and January through May, Justices are appointed by the governor and then approved by the Connecticut General Assembly. They may continue to hear cases as Judge Trial Referees in the Superior Court or the Appellate Court, Justices may assume Senior Status before attaining age 70 and continue to sit with the Supreme Court, as needed. Multiple Justices have availed themselves of this option, for example, Justice Ellen Ash Peters took Senior Status in 1996, continuing to sit until 2000 and Justice Angelo Santaniello assumed senior status in 1987 and continued to sit as needed until 1994. Justice Armentano assumed Senior Status in 1983 but continued to sit with the Court as needed, Chief Justice Callahan assumed senior status in 1999 but served for approximately another year as a Senior Justice. Chief Justice Sullivan assumed senior status in 2006 but continued to sit until 2009, Justice Vertefeuille assumed senior status in 2010 but has remained active with the Court. In the event of a recusal or absence, a Judge of the Appellate or Superior Court may be called to sit with the Supreme Court, Judge Francis X. Hennessy also frequently served by designation on the Court. Notable former justices include, Anthony J. Armentano, Served as lieutenant governor, raymond E. Baldwin, Only person to serve as Governor of Connecticut and Chief Justice. Still active as a Judge Trial Referee in New Haven, joseph W. Bogdanski - Modernized Connecticut jurisprudence, also an outspoken dissenter like Robert Berdon, served briefly as Chief Justice, part of the majority in Horton v. Messkill. Anthony Grillo After nearly 20 prolific years as a Trial Judge, capped off his career on the Supreme Court and wrote 56 opinions, Robert Glass, First African-American named to the Supreme Court, the Waterbury Juvenile Matters Courthouse is now named for him. Lubbie Harper, Jr. Komisarjevsky, and State v. Santiago, capped off his 15-year career as a member of the Supreme Court. Still active as a Judge Trial Referee designated to the Appellate Court, Arthur Healey, Also served with Ellen Ash Peters and David Shea and innovated State Constitutional Law, former Chief Judge of the Superior Court before the major judicial reorganization of 1978. T. Clark Hull, Former State Senator and Lieutenant Governor, Joette Katz, Retired from the court to serve as the Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families of Connecticut C. Ian McLachlan, Retired from the court and entered private practice, William M. Maltbie Francis M. McDonald, Jr. Still active as a Judge Trial Referee and sitting with the Appellate Court, Ellen Ash Peters First woman to serve on the court, innovated Connecticut Constitutional Law. Still active as a Judge Trial Referee, leo Parskey, Scholar who served with Ellen Ash Peters, Arthur Healey, and David Shea. Tapping Reeve, Succeeded Stephen Mix Mitchell, founded Litchfield Law School, Angelo Santaniello Innovated the Pre-Argument Conference program for settling appeals before oral arguments, ran the Supreme Court on Circuit program taking the Court throughout Connecticut
13.
Kentucky Supreme Court
–
The Kentucky Supreme Court was created by a 1975 constitutional amendment and is the state supreme court of the U. S. state of Kentucky. Prior to that the Kentucky Court of Appeals was the appellate court in Kentucky. The Kentucky Court of Appeals is now Kentuckys intermediate appellate court, criminal appeals involving a sentence of death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of twenty years or more are heard directly by the Kentucky Supreme Court, bypassing the Kentucky Court of Appeals. All other cases are heard on a basis on appeal from the Kentucky Court of Appeals. The Kentucky Supreme Court promulgates the Rules of Court and Rules of Evidence, through two of its subagencies, the Kentucky Office of Bar Admissions and Kentucky Bar Association, it is the final arbiter for bar admissions and discipline. In the event that two or more justices of the Kentucky Supreme Court recuse themselves from a case, the Governor of Kentucky appoints Special Justices to sit for that particular case, the court meets in a courtroom located on the second floor of the Kentucky State Capitol in Frankfort. The second floor of the building is also home to offices for the justices. The Administrative Office of the Courts, under the aegis of the Kentucky Supreme Court, serves as the administrative agency for Kentucky courts. The role of the AOC is similar to that of the Legislative Research Commission for the Kentucky General Assembly, in its short history, the Kentucky Supreme Court has not produced much jurisprudence of note. Notable decisions of the Kentucky Supreme Court include Kentucky v. Wasson,842 S. W. 2d 487, in which the court invalidated the criminalization of same-sex sodomy as a state equal protection violation. In 2003, the United States Supreme Court reversed itself and overturned Bowers, while some thought the Kentucky Supreme Court Wasson opinion to have been progressive, others criticized the opinion for having no basis in the 1890 Kentucky Constitution. The Court has seven justices, each of whom is elected for a term from one of seven geographic districts in non-partisan elections. The justices terms are staggered, they do not all run for election in the same years, the justices choose one of their number to serve a four-year term as chief justice who serves as the administrative head of both the Supreme Court and the Kentucky Court of Justice. The first chief justice was Samuel Steinfeld, who had been the chief justice of the Court of Appeals since 1972, Courts of Kentucky List of Justices of the Kentucky Supreme Court Website of the Kentucky Supreme Court Database of Kentucky Supreme Court Opinions
14.
Supreme Court of Mississippi
–
The Supreme Court of Mississippi is the highest court in the state of Mississippi. It was created in the first constitution of the state following its admission as a State of the Union in 1817, initially it was known as the High Court of Errors and Appeals. The court is a court, as opposed to a trial court. The Court Building is located in downtown Jackson, Mississippi, the state capital, the title of the tribunal was changed by the constitution of 1869 to the Supreme Court of Mississippi and the judges were appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. The provisions of the constitution of 1869 were perpetuated in the constitution of 1890, the jurisdiction of the court is mandated by statute. The court has jurisdiction, for example, over reviewing capital punishment cases. The Mississippi Court of Appeals, the other appellate court, was created by the legislature to assist the high court in managing a large caseload. The Court of Appeals generally handles criminal cases and cases concerning family law issues, after the Court of Appeals makes its ruling, aggrieved parties in certain types of cases there may seek further review from the Mississippi Supreme Court by petitioning for a Writ of Certiorari. The court is made up of a total of nine justices - one chief, generally, the justices are elected for eight-year terms, with staggered election years, from three geographical districts to ensure fair representation. However, it is common for the governor to appoint a justice to fill a seat vacated by the death or retirement of a justice, if less than half of the term remains, the appointee serves the remainder of the term. If more than half of the remains, the appointee may serve until a special election is held. Seniority of the justices is determined by length of time in office, the chief justice is the current justice who has been in office the longest, and the presiding justices are next two in seniority. Beam Currently King is the only African-American justice, though neither is the first such justice to serve on the court, the first female justice was Lenore Prather, who became chief justice, the first African-American was Reuben Anderson. To date, no female African-American justice has served on the Mississippi Supreme Court
15.
Maryland Court of Appeals
–
The Court of Appeals of Maryland is the supreme court of the U. S. state of Maryland. The court, which is composed of one judge and six associate judges, meets in the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building in the state capital. The term of the Court begins the second Monday of September, the Court is unique among American courts in that the judges wear red robes. The Maryland Court of Appeals joins the New York Court of Appeals in being the two state Supreme Courts to bear the name Court of Appeals rather than Supreme Court. As Marylands highest court, the Court of Appeals reviews cases of major and minor importance. Throughout the year, the Court of Appeals holds hearings on the adoption or amendment of rules of practice and it also supervises the Attorney Grievance Commission and State Board of Law Examiners in attorney disciplinary and admission matters. The Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals, designated by the Governor, is the administrative head of the Maryland judicial system. Cases typically come before the Court of Appeals on a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals, the court can decline the petition, and refuse to hear the case, or it can grant the cert, and hear the appeal. The judges sometimes decide to hear an appeal before the appellate court has heard the case. This is known as the Court granting certiorari on its own motion, in this instance, the writ of certiorari is issued to the trial court, rather than to the Court of Special Appeals. In practice, almost all cases are heard by seven judges, additionally, it has exclusive jurisdiction in death penalty appeals. As the states supreme court, the Court of Appeals likewise retains original jurisdiction to all attorneys admitted to the practice of law in Maryland. They can impose penalties ranging from reprimands to the punishment, disbarrment. The seven judges of the Court of Appeals are appointed by the Governor of Maryland with Senate consent, however, note that the ballot for re-election says only for continuance in office. The Judges of the court are required to be citizens of, prior to their appointment, they must have resided in Maryland for at least five years, and must have resided for at least six months in the appellate judicial circuit from which they are appointed. They must be at least thirty years of age at the time of appointment, appointees should be most distinguished for integrity, wisdom and sound legal knowledge. If the voters reject the retention in office of a judge, or the vote is tied, otherwise, the incumbent judge is retained in office for a ten-year term. This requirement of approval is similar to provisions in the Missouri Plan
16.
New York Court of Appeals
–
The New York Court of Appeals is the highest court in the U. S. state of New York. The Court of Appeals consists of seven judges, the Chief Judge, the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals also heads administration of the states court system, and thus is also known as the Chief Judge of the State of New York. The 1842 Neoclassical courthouse is located in New Yorks capital, Albany, in most U. S. states and the Federal court system the court of last resort is known as the Supreme Court. New York, however, calls its trial and intermediate appellate courts the Supreme Court, further adding to misunderstanding is New Yorks terminology for jurists on its top two courts. Appeals are taken from the four departments of the New York Supreme Court, in some cases, an appeal lies of right, but in most cases, permission to appeal must be obtained, either from the Appellate Division itself or from the Court of Appeals. In some criminal cases, some decisions by an Appellate Term or County Court are also appealable to the Court of Appeals. In a few cases, an appeal can be taken from the court of first instance to the Court of Appeals, direct appeals are authorized from final trial-court decisions in civil cases where the only issue is the constitutionality of a federal or state statute. Decisions from the Court of Appeals are binding authority on all lower courts, every opinion, memorandum, and motion of the Court of Appeals sent to the New York State Reporter is required to be published in the New York Reports. The New York State Unified Court System is a state court system that functions under the Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals who is the ex officio Chief Judge of New York. The Chief Judge supervises the seven-judge Court of Appeals and is chair of the Administrative Board of the Courts, in addition, the Chief Judge establishes standards and administrative policies after consultation with the Administrative Board and approval by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals promulgates rules for admission to law in New York. The New York State Reporter is the reporter of decisions and is appointed by the Court of Appeals. For a complete list of Chief Judges see Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, for a list of Associate Judges see Associate Judges of the New York Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals was created by the New York State Constitution of 1846 to replace both the Court for the Correction of Errors and the Court of Chancery, and had eight members. Four judges were elected by general ballot at the State elections, the first four judges elected at the special judicial state election in June 1847 were Freeborn G. Jewett, Greene C. Bronson, Charles H. Ruggles, and Addison Gardiner and they took office on July 5,1847. Afterwards, every two years, one judge was elected in odd-numbered years to an eight-year term, in case of a vacancy, a judge was temporarily appointed by the Governor, and at the next odd-year state election a judge was elected for the remainder of the term. The Chief Judge was always one of the elected judges who had the shortest remaining term
17.
New York Supreme Court
–
The Supreme Court of the State of New York is the trial-level court of general jurisdiction in the New York State Unified Court System. It is vested with unlimited civil and criminal jurisdiction, although outside New York City it acts primarily as a court of civil jurisdiction, there is a branch of the New York Supreme Court in each of New Yorks 62 counties. Unlike in most other states, the Supreme Court is a court and is not the highest court in the state. The highest court of the State of New York is the Court of Appeals, in practice, the Supreme Court hears civil actions involving claims above a certain monetary amount that puts the claim beyond the jurisdiction of lower courts. The Supreme Court also hears cases involving claims for equitable relief, such as injunctions, specific performance, or rescission of a contract. The Supreme Court also has jurisdiction of matrimonial actions, such as either contested or uncontested actions for a divorce or annulment. This court is intermediate between the New York Supreme Court and the New York Court of Appeals, there is one Appellate Division, which for administrative purposes comprises four judicial departments. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in each department is authorized to establish appellate terms. Appellate terms are located in the First and Second Judicial Departments only, in New York City, the Appellate Term hears appeals from the New York City Civil Court and Criminal Court. In the Second Department outside New York City, it hears appeals from the Nassau and Suffolk County District Courts, city courts, the court sits in three-judge panels, with two justices constituting a quorum and being necessary for a decision. Decisions by the Appellate Term must be followed by courts whose appeals lie to it, in New York City, all felony cases are heard in criminal terms. In New York City, all civil cases are heard in civil terms. In each judicial district outside New York City, an Administrator is responsible for supervising all courts and agencies, the Administrator is also assisted by the District Executive and support staff. The district administrative offices are responsible for personnel, purchasing, budgets, revenue, computer automation, court interpreters, court security, opinions of the New York trial courts are published selectively in the Miscellaneous Reports. A judge of the New York Supreme Court is titled justice, Justices are nominated by judicial district nominating conventions, with judicial delegates themselves elected from assembly districts. Some county committees play a significant role in their judicial district conventions, sometimes, the parties cross-endorse each others candidates, while at other times they do not and incumbent judges must actively campaign for re-election. Judicial conventions have been criticized as opaque, brief and dominated by county party leaders, in practice, most of the power of selecting justices belongs to local political party organizations, such as the Kings County Democratic County Committee, which control the delegates. The process was challenged in litigation which resulted in a U. S. Supreme Court decision in N. Y
18.
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
–
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the court of last resort for all criminal matters in the State of Texas, United States. The Court, which is based in the Supreme Court Building in Downtown Austin, is composed of a Presiding Judge, article V of the Texas Constitution vests the judicial power of the state and describes the Courts jurisdiction and sets rules for judicial eligibility, elections, and vacancies. The Court of Criminal Appeals exercises discretionary review over criminal cases, the only cases that the Court must hear are those involving the sentencing of capital punishment or the denial of bail. The Court is composed of a Presiding Judge and eight judges, each judge serves a six-year term beginning January 1 and ending December 31, and they are elected in staggered partisan elections. Although all nine seats are elected at large, the Presiding Judge seat is designated from the other seats. In order to be a judge, a person must be at least 35 years of age, a United States and Texas citizen, licensed to practice law in Texas, a person 75 years or older cannot run for a seat on the Court of Criminal Appeals. A person who becomes 75 during their term of office cannot serve more than four years of their term of office, the Governor of Texas, subject to Senate confirmation, may appoint a judge to serve out the remainder of any unexpired term until the next general election. On the occasions when the Court of Criminal Appeals grants relief, the appointment of attorneys for indigent defendants in capital cases is a source of controversy. District Court judges appoint lawyers for trial and an initial appeal. Of the 131 inmates executed under Governor George W. Bush,43 were represented by an attorney who at some point has been disbarred, suspended or otherwise sanctioned. The appointment of attorneys for an inmates final appeals, which allow attorneys to move beyond what occurred at trial, attorneys at this stage can argue, for instance, that prosecutors improperly concealed evidence favorable to the defendant. Before 1995, appellants were not guaranteed an attorney for final appeals, in 1995, Texas revamped its system with a new law that collapsed the layers of appeal and set strict filing deadlines seeking to ensure that defendants received one full, fair set of appeals. The state agreed to pay for court-appointed attorneys to handle the final appeals for Death Row inmates, the Court of Criminal Appeals got the job of making these appointments. While assigning attorneys in about 300 cases, the Court of Criminal Appeals tapped some with questionable credentials or little experience. For at least eight Death Row inmates, the court handpicked an attorney who previously had been sanctioned by the State Bar of Texas for misconduct and he was among four attorneys appointed by the court who had been disciplined more than once. In a ninth case, the attorney was sanctioned shortly after his appointment, the misconduct ranged from relatively minor infractions to serious violations. They included failing to show up in court, lying to the State Bar of Texas or to a judge and he filed only one claim, a challenge to the law itself, rather than raise issues that might have granted Kerr a new trial. Thus, per Texas law, he forfeited Kerrs right to other issues later
19.
Court of Federal Claims
–
The United States Court of Federal Claims is a United States federal court that hears monetary claims against the U. S. government. It is the successor to the United States Court of Claims, which was founded in 1855. The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims is currently codified in 28 U. S. C, the court is established pursuant to Congresss authority under Article One of the United States Constitution. Unlike judges of courts established under Article Three of the United States Constitution, instead they serve for 15-year terms and are eligible for reappointment. The President appoints the judges of the U. S. Court of Federal Claims with the Senates advice and consent. The judges are removable by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for incompetency, misconduct, neglect of duty, engaging in the practice of law, or physical or mental disability. The courthouse of the Court of Federal Claims is situated in the Howard T. Markey National Courts Building in Washington, the legislation was signed into law on February 24,1855, by President Franklin Pierce. For this reason, the court has been referred to as the “keeper of the nation’s conscience” and “the People’s Court. ”As originally in 1855, the court lacked the essential judicial power to render final judgments. ”In 1887, Congress passed the Tucker Act, which expanded the court’s jurisdiction to include all claims against the government except tort, equitable. The court thus today has nationwide jurisdiction over most suits for monetary claims against the government and sits, without a jury, to issues of law. The general jurisdiction of the court, described in 28 U. S. C, the court also possesses jurisdiction over claims for patent and copyright infringement against the United States, as well as over certain suits by Indian tribes. Additionally, the court has jurisdiction to hear both pre-award and post-award bid protest suits by unsuccessful bidders on government contracts, a unique aspect of the court’s jurisdiction throughout its history has been the authority to act on congressional references of legislative proposals for compensation of individual claims. As eventually codified in 28 U. S. C, §1492, either House of Congress may refer a bill to the Chief Judge of the court for an investigation and a report to Congress. A judge of the court is assigned to act as the hearing officer, then a three-judge review panel submits a report to Congress for its consideration and disposition of such claims for compensation. Befitting its unique role, the court has been located throughout its history in Washington, DC and it first met in May 1855 at Willard’s Hotel. In July of that year, it moved into the Capitol, after briefly using the Supreme Court’s chamber in the basement of the Capitol, it then acquired its own rooms there. In 1879, the court obtained space on the floor of the Freedman’s Bank Building. Two decades later, in 1899, the moved to the building formerly occupied by William Corcoran’s art collection across Lafayette Park at the intersection of 17th Street. It remained there for 65 years, when the facilities there were deemed inadequate by the mid- 1950s, the court asked Congress for a new location
20.
Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)
–
The Court of Appeal of the High Court of Hong Kong is the second most senior court in the Hong Kong legal system. It deals with appeals on all civil and criminal cases from the Court of First Instance and it is one of two courts that makes up the High Court of Hong Kong. This court also hears appeals from the Lands Tribunal and various tribunals, the current president of the Court of Appeal is Andrew Cheung, Chief Judge of the High Court of Hong Kong. Judiciary of Hong Kong Appellate court Hong Kong Judiciary website, High Court page
21.
High Court (Hong Kong)
–
It was named the Supreme Court before 1997. Though previously named the Supreme Court, this Court has long been the equivalent to the Senior Courts of England. SC Ms Linda CHAN Ching-fan, SC Mr Robert John WHITEHEAD, SC The High Court Building is located at 38 Queensway, the 20-storey building was built in 1985 as the home of the then Supreme Court of Hong Kong, which was renamed in 1997. It was named the Supreme Court Building, and the leading to its main entrance is still named Supreme Court Road. The High Court Building was designed by Architect K. M. Tseng, the structure is a white clad tower and has a water fountain outside its front door. Hong Kong Judiciary website, High Court page Judiciary of Hong Kong Legal system of Hong Kong Supreme Court of Hong Kong Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong
22.
Court of Appeal (England and Wales)
–
Within the English legal system, the Court of Appeal is second only to the Supreme Court. Established in 1875, the Court of Appeal today comprises 39 Lord Justices of Appeal, the Court has two divisions, Criminal and Civil, led by the Lord Chief Justice and Master of the Rolls respectively. Criminal appeals are heard in its Criminal Division, and civil appeals in the Civil Division, the Criminal Division also hears appeals from the Crown Court, while the Civil Division hears appeals from the County Courts and High Court of Justice. Leave to appeal is required either the lower court or the Court of Appeal itself. The appeal system before 1875 was chaotic and this was the subject of a review by the Judicature Commission, established in 1867 to consider the creation of a Supreme Court which was published in 1869. The recommendation was that there should be a system of appeal from all of the High Court divisions. This was instituted by the Judicature Acts, with the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 giving an almost limitless right of appeal to the Lords. The new legal structure provided a single Court of Appeal, which heard appeals from all the various Divisions of the new unified High Court of Justice, after the opening of the Royal Courts of Justice in 1882 the Court of Appeal transferred there, where it remains. The appeals from the County Courts were seen similarly, involving an appeal to the High Court of Justice, the process of leapfrogging, which they had recommended, was eventually brought into force with the Administration of Justice Act 1969. A separate Court of Criminal Appeal had been established in 1908, in 1966 this was merged with its older namesake, establishing the present-day structure of a single Court of Appeal with two Divisions. In the early 1960s there was an exchange between judges and academics in the United Kingdom and United States comparing the process of used in both nations. After a trial in the Court of Appeal, despite the success of this, the court which Lord Denning presided over from 1962 to 1982 was under no pressure and had no inclination to modernise, with liaisons and management handled by clerks with little knowledge. This changed in 1981 with the appointment of a Registrar, John Adams, an academic and lawyer, in July 1996, Lord Woolf published Access to Justice, a report on the accessibility of the courts to the public. Woolf identified civil litigation as being characterised by excessive cost, delay and complexity, and managed to replace the diverse rules with a single set of Civil Procedure Rules. Bowman noted a growing workload and delays, with 14 months between setting down and disposing of a case in 70 percent of cases, the rest taking even longer than that – some had five years. Bowmans recommendations were enacted through statutory provisions, such as Part IV of the Access to Justice Act 1999. In Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald 1 WLR1311, Brooke LJ laid down the procedural methods of the Court of Appeal post-Woolf and Bowman. With a few exceptions, such as cases where the liberty of the subject is an issue, permission is required to appeal, the Civil Division deals with all non-criminal cases, and has been part of the Court since its establishment in 1875
