Search results

This Although the pros that register on the Civil Procedure Code andadministrative –principally singled specialized part of administrative disputesand procedures before the judiciary-, but he did not devoid of many of the gapsexposed by the applications later.And is the subject of the distribution of jurisdiction between the ordinaryadministrative and judicial authorities most important of these gaps and themost complex, distribution, although it put arbiter between specialists, but didnot constitute a precision and clarity are spent on the intensification of conflictsbetween the judicial authorities, and to eliminate the presence of conflict isproof of this.In this presentation we refer to one administrative disputes that provokedconsiderable controversy in the courtyard of the judiciary topics, the subject ofdisputes, public facilities, by searching in the most important criteria adoptedby the Algerian legislature to determine the jurisdiction of the qualitative inthese disputes, especially as he did not make individually jurisdiction of theadministrative by the judiciary never make it, but also of the jurisdiction of theordinary courts in our study, relying on laws and jurisprudence.

Examines the jurisdiction, both contentious and advisory, of the ICJ as a specific permanent international court or tribunal. This title also covers the jurisdiction of: the World Court, that is, the ICJ and PCIJ - both contentious and advisory jurisdiction, the leading International Administrative Tribunals, and the ECHR, ICSID tribunals

This edited volume explores the development of the Austrian codification of administrative procedure and the subsequent spread of Austrian ideas and institutions across Europe. The book thus provides an unprecedented outlook on the emergence of an increasing common core regarding administrative procedure, and the consequences it had for other legal systems.

This publication provides a comprehensive view of displacement and explores what international and domestic law can contribute to prevent, address, and resolve internal displacement. It emphasizes the primary responsibility of states to address the needs of internally displaced persons and views them as citizens with rights and agency.

This edited volume reports the antecedents, foundations, organization, basic principles, and challenges to fourteen European constitutions. They include countries with long-lasting and recently amended constitutions, decentralized or unitary, with different political systems and institutional settings.

This volume offers an extensive collection of illustrative original materials, many of which are previously unpublished. It contains significant new material on the history of habeas corpus, mandamus, and certiorari, as well as well-known constitutional landmarks from the earliest times to 1750. Writing on the history of public law has tended to focus solely on the texts of statutes and formal records. In contrast, the book concentrates on the forensic arguments and judicial decisions that led to the emergence of legal principles in the field of public law, including criminal law and the regulation of jurisdictions.

America's marketplace of ideas is threatened by social media platforms and a government security apparatus that have joined together to suppress the free exchange of ideas. In 'Free Speech and Turbulent Freedom', Michael J. Glennon offers an incisive defense of free speech in the digital public square. Drawing on the intellectual journey of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who shaped the modern First Amendment, Glennon argues that a lively and robust marketplace of ideas is the surest guarantor of social stability. Crisply written and lucidly argued, this timely book calls on the courts to protect the speech interests not merely of the government and Big Tech, but of all participants in the marketplace of ideas.

Michael W. McConnell and Nathan S. Chapman detail the theological, political, and philosophical underpinnings of religious disestablishment in the United States - and how they relate to modern controversies over school funding, accommodation, public prayer, and public religious symbols. They argue that the clause is not a thumb on the scale for secularism in public matters (let alone the opposite) but a constitutional commitment for Americans of all religious commitments - and none - to agree to disagree about matters of faith.