My Account
Log in Registration
All
Cart
Highlights
Fiction Books
Non-Fiction Books
Children's Books
Rare Books
Music
DVD & Blu-Ray
Video Games
Category
Wishlists
Cart
All
Free US shipping over $10
Trustpilot
Proud to be B-Corp

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process Peter Gerangelos

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process By Peter Gerangelos

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process by Peter Gerangelos

Reviews:
$156.19
Condition - New
Only 2 left
New

Summary

This book examines the constitutional principles governing the relationship between legislatures and courts.

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process Summary

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process: Constitutional Principles and Limitations by Peter Gerangelos

This book examines the constitutional principles governing the relationship between legislatures and courts at that critical crossroads of their power where legislatures may seek to intervene in the judicial process, or to interfere with judicial functions, to secure outcomes consistent with their policy objectives or interests. Cases of high political moment are usually involved, where the temptation, indeed political imperative, for legislatures to intervene can be overwhelming. Although the methods of intervention are various, ranging from the direct and egregious to the subtle and imperceptible, unbridled legislative power in this regard has been a continuing concern in all common law jurisdictions. Prominent examples include direct legislative interference in pending cases, usurpation of judicial power by legislatures, limitations on the jurisdiction of courts, strategic amendments to law applicable to cases pending appeal, and attempts directly to overturn court decisions in particular cases. Because the doctrine of the separation of powers, as an entrenched constitutional rule, is a major source of principle, the book will examine in detail the jurisprudence of the United States and Australia in particular. These jurisdictions have identical constitutional provisions entrenching that doctrine as well as the most developed jurisprudence on this point. The legal position in the United Kingdom, which does not have an entrenched separation of powers doctrine, will be examined as a counterpoint. Other relevant jurisdictions (such as Canada, Ireland and India) are also examined in the context of particular principles, particularly when their respective jurisprudence is rather more developed on discrete points. The book examines how the relevant constitutional principles strive to maintain the primacy of the law-making role of the legislature in a representative democracy and yet afford the decisional independence of the judiciary that degree of protection essential to protect it from the legislature's 'impetuous vortex', to borrow the words of James Madison from The Federalist (No 48).

The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process Reviews

...a fascinating topic, and Gerangelos is someone who obviously knows the material incredibly well, and has thought deeply on the question of the nature of the separation of powers...Anyone who is deeply interested in the question of the legislative-judicial relationship will find this analysis to be thorough and illuminating. Rebecca Hamlin Law & Politics Book Review Vol.19, No.12 (December 14, 2009) Peter Gerangelos's book, focusing on when legislative interference in the judicial process is legitimate, is a welcome addition to this literature. Gerangelos's book is perhaps the most comprehensive monograph analysing the law related to the problem of legislative interference in the judicial process. It is thorough and detailed, well researched, and provides an up-to-date statement of the current situation in several important common law countries. It will be useful to jurists seeking to understand how the law in this area developed over the past century and the problems that have resulted from this development. Adam Shinar Public Law April 2010

About Peter Gerangelos

Dr Peter A Gerangelos is the Associate Dean (Undergraduate Studies) and Senior Lecturer in Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney, Australia. He was previously Principal Solicitor in the Office of the Australian Government Solicitor.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction I. The Relevant Scenarios II. Definitional Difficulties III. The Original Legal Entrenchment of the Doctrine and the Underlying Rationale IV. The Possibility of General Principles and Interpretational Methodology V. The Purposive Nature of The Separation of Powers Doctrine VI. The Problem of Definition and the Formalist Approach VII. Core Branch Functions? 2 Legislative Interference in the Pending Case Scenario: The Foundation of Principle and the Australian Position I. Introduction II. The Australian Constitutional Position and the Early Australian Constitutional Scholars III. Early Development of Principle by the High Court IV. The Foundation of a Discrete Set of Principles Governing the Pending Case Scenario: Liyanage v R V. Consolidation of Principle Post-Liyanage VI. The Direction Rule at the Crossroads: Nicholas v The Queen VII. The Uncertain Status of the Direction Principle in Australia 3 Legislative Interference with Judicial Functions: The Jurisprudence of the United States, Evaluation of Principle, and Towards Resolution I. Introduction II. The Emergence of the Changed Law Rule and the Direction Principle in the United States III. Klein and Its Uncertain Meaning IV. Hart's Thesis and the United States Foundation of the Direction Principle V. The Decline of the Direction Rule: The Robertson Case VI. Robertson's Uncertain Legacy: Plaut v Spendthrift Farm Inc VII. Klein Qualified, Overruled or Misinterpreted? Miller v French VIII. The Schiavo Litigation IX. Further Confirmation of the Direction Principle X. General Conclusions on the Separation of Powers and the Pending Case Scenario XI. Towards a Resolution XII. A Reformulated Direction Principle XIII. Speculative Propositions XIV. Conclusion 4 The Separation of Powers and Final Judgments: Defining the Principle Limiting Legislative Revision of Final Judgments I. Introduction and Definition of Final Judgment II. Reflections on Finality Where the Separation Doctrine is Not Entrenched III. A Middle Case: India IV. Early Australian Commentary on the Constitutional Protection of Final Judgments V. The Current Australian Position VI. Qualifications VII. A Reinforcement of Australian Jurisprudence: The Irish Position on Final Judgments VIII. The United States Supreme Court and Final Judgments IX. The Wheeling Bridge Qualification X. The Development and Consolidation of Principle by the United States Supreme Court XI. The Inviolability Principle Tested: Miller v French XII. Conclusion 5 Qualifications to the Inviolability of Final Judgments and Final Summation I. Introduction II. The Wheeling Bridge Qualification, the Regulation of Public Rights and 'Conditional' Final Judgments III. The Waiver Qualification IV. Conclusions on the Final Case Scenario 6 Protections Afforded Decisional Independence in Jurisdictions without an Entrenched Separation of Powers I. Introduction II. The United Kingdom and the Separation of Powers III. The European Convention on Human Rights IV. The United Kingdom, the ECHR and the Human Rights Act 1998. V. Canons of Statutory Intepretation 7 Conclusion

Additional information

NPB9781841136615
9781841136615
1841136611
The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process: Constitutional Principles and Limitations by Peter Gerangelos
Peter Gerangelos
New
Hardback
Bloomsbury Publishing PLC
2009-04-10
328
N/A
Book picture is for illustrative purposes only, actual binding, cover or edition may vary.
This is a new book - be the first to read this copy. With untouched pages and a perfect binding, your brand new copy is ready to be opened for the first time

Customer Reviews - The Separation of Powers and Legislative Interference in Judicial Process