Justice and Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Justice and Law - Essay Example Lay judges work together to decide upon whether or not there is sufficient evidence for a defendant to be sent to be tried at a higher court. They also settle some matters involving family law. (Clark, 1992). In Germany, laypeople serve as judges in the commercial and criminal sections of state district courts. Serving on a panel of two or three, they work for a fixed term and are paid for their services. While in other countries, lay judges are only used at lower court levels, in Germany they are also used in the appellate Federal Labor Court and the Federal Social Security Court. In these instances they serve in a mixed tribunal, where professional judges constitute the majority. (Clark, 1992). France uses laypeople to a great degree in a series of specialized tribunals. Commercial hearings involve the use of business people elected by their peers, who serve for an initial two year term and then up to four more four year terms. Cases involving labor disputes make use of five groups of laypeople that represent the five sections of the economy. Each group is made up of the same number of people, and within each group there are the same number of employee representatives and employer representatives. These laypeople are elected to serve a term of six years. Similarly, social security cases involve the use one employee representative and one employer representative; these laypeople are chosen by organizations to serve a five year term. Cases involving rural leases use two representatives of farm leasers and two elected representatives of farm lessees that are elected to serve a term of six years. In all of the aforementioned specialized tribunals, laypeople are not paid for th eir services. (Clark, 1992). Historically, socialist countries such as China have used laypeople to quite an extensive degree. China used to use a large number of lay judges elected by residents to serve alongside professional judges. In the last couple of decades, however, the use of judges has become more professionalized; less and less laypeople are being used. Many cases are now being determined by a single judge, which gets rid of the need for laypeople. (Clark, 1992). In Japan, on the other hand, laypeople are being used to an even greater extent than ever. Beginning in May 2009, jury duty for laypeople will sometimes include cases that involve the death penalty. (Peters, 2008). In contrast to Japan giving weighty decisions to laypeople, Saudi Arabia barely uses laypeople. Based on the highly religious Sharia (Islamic Law), laypeople are not considered to understand Sharia; nor is this sort of material made easily accessible to them. In addition, many people in Saudi Arabia are illiterate. The scant use of laypeople in Saudi Arabia has led to much corruption in the courts there. (Human Rights Watch, 2008). While the United States sometimes uses fines as punishments for minor offenses, this is much more commonly done in Western Europe where it is also used for major criminal offenses. Judges in the United States have faced difficulty punishing criminals with fines that are fair in terms of what they did and what their economic situation is like. In Western Europe, however, day fines are used. Day fines are the fines that are adjusted to be proportional to an

United Kingdom Reforms Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

United Kingdom Reforms - Essay Example The act assists buyers to obtain legal redress when they encounter problems with their purchases. The act requires that the supplier should sell goods that fit their description, serve their intended purpose and are of satisfactory quality. The act benefits suppliers, who comply, as they can use their conformity to their advantage, as they use it to boost their consumer relationships. The act essentially aims to protect individual customers from defected or unsafe goods. The Act covers traded contracts made on or after 1 January 1894. Prior before the passing of the 1995 Act, the sale of goods act 1979, (c 54) was applied. This Act of Parliament regulated English contract law as well as the UK commercial law regarding goods traded. The m1979 act merged the original act of 1893 as well as subsequent legislation that consecutively codified and joined the law. Before the 1995 Act, section 16 barred transferring of ownership in goods to the buyer from the seller until the goods were established. Under s.20A of the 1979 Act, as buyer becomes the owner in common bulk2 of property, in an undivided share, in the bulk transferred to him. S.16 of the 1979 act provides that where there is a contract for selling unascertained goods, the property cannot be passed to the buyer unless or until the goods are identified. The buyer acquires no aptness interest in the goods he paid for since he was regarded as an unsecured creditor for the return in price in the occurrence of insolvency. This rendered for the sellers creditors benefitting with an undeserved windfall 3 as they will claim both goods and money paid for them. When all the requirements have been met, the property ownership of the undivided share is given to the purchaser unless both parties agree. The purchased share is a fraction of the bulk goods as an equal owner. Section 61 (1) of the 1979 Act describes the bulk as a collection of goods of the same type contained in the same area or space and is such that goods in the mass are interchangeable with other goods of the same quantity or number. The goods can be ascertained by separation from the bulk through either exhaustion3 or consolidation4. This act was biased to extents that, even if the seller sold all his goods to different clients, thereby divesting himself all interest in the bulk, no property will be passed to the clients until the quant ities have been ascertained. The same applied if the seller became insolvent while the goods were still in bulk or the seller’s creditor arrested the bulk. This entails that the buyers or buyer will have no claim even if they had paid for the goods fully or partly. The buyer will only claim for damages, breach of contract or return of price only as an unsecured creditor 5but will have no equitable interest in the goods. Furthermore, traders who purchased goods either on land or in the course of the sea were concerned of this problem. In addition, suing carriers of goods by sea was covered on agreement  in a bill of lading6 was under the Bills of lading Act1855, covering the transfer of property in the goods by the bill. Therefore, the buyer of part of the bulk had no right of suing the transporter in contract if the goods in transit were missing or damaged. In addition, Section 16 stressed the Lading Bills did not convey the intended meaning by the parties as outlined by th e known Law commission. The parties’