Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "Supreme Court decision" wg kryterium: Wszystkie pola


Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3
Tytuł:
Glosa do postanowienia Sądu Najwyższego z 20 kwietnia 2017 r., II KK 116/171
Commentary to the Decision of the Supreme Court of 20 April 2017, II KK 116/17
Autorzy:
Kulik, Marek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/519103.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Jagielloński. Fundacja Utriusque Iuris
Tematy:
limitation
continous offence
offence prosecuted on private accusation
Opis:
The commentary concerns determining the statute of limitation of the criminal offense of a private prosecution committed under the conditions specified in art. 12 of the Criminal Code. The author shares the view expressed by the Supreme Court, that the limitation period runs from the date of ending the last behavior included in the act. Otherwise than the Supreme Court, he thinks, that what the victim finds out only after the end of the act is not the perpetrator, but the final form of the act. Only using functional interpretation one can justify the accuracy of the final result of the interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court, according to which the limitation period starts with the end of the act. Therefore, for correct interpretation, it is not enough to use only language and methods of logic, but it is necessary to take into account the axiological directive of the purpose of the provision. The author fully shares the computatio civilis method of calculating the limitations adopted by the Supreme Court. However, the author supplements the Supreme Court’s argumentation with the linguistic argument resulting from the fact that the regulation refers to “time” and not “day”.
Źródło:
Forum Prawnicze; 2018, 1 (45); 86-95
2081-688X
Pojawia się w:
Forum Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
O nowe prawo do grobu? Glosa krytyczna do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 24 czerwca 2019 roku, III CSK 267/17
The New Right of Burial? A Critical Commentary to the Decision of the Supreme Court of 24.6.2019, Ref. III CSK 267/17
Autorzy:
Walczak, Patryk
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/518827.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Jagielloński. Fundacja Utriusque Iuris
Tematy:
right of burial
inheritability
patrimonial rights
alternative inheritance proceedings
singular succesion mortis causa
Opis:
This paper concerns the concept of the right of burial, developed in the jurisprudence and upheld in the commented decision. The heterogeneous concept of the right of burial – the patrimonial rights in the case of an empty grave and non-patrimonial rights, when someone is already buried in the grave – has been adopted. Such a clas- sification has consequences in the inheritability and transferability of this right, especially in this second form. The judiciary has created, in the name of the proper protection of the personal rights of the deceased’s relatives, indirectly, the alterna- tive succession proceedings concerning the non-patrimonial right of burial. It seems, however, that this concept does more harm than good. The broader legal protection is only illusory, creates uncertainty in the legal system, unnecessary costs and non-intuitive legal solutions. It raises concerns whether an a priori rejection of the homogeneous concept of the right of burial conducted in case law is rational.
Źródło:
Forum Prawnicze; 2020, 1 (57); 91-99
2081-688X
Pojawia się w:
Forum Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego Stanów Zjednoczonych z dnia 20 czerwca 2019 r. w sprawie American Legion v. American Humanist Association z 2019 r.
Commentary to the Decision of the U.S. Supreme Court of 20 June 2019 in American Legion v. American Humanist Association (2019)
Autorzy:
Maroń, Grzegorz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/518718.pdf
Data publikacji:
2019
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Jagielloński. Fundacja Utriusque Iuris
Tematy:
religious symbols
principle of religious neutrality of state
case-law
the United States
Opis:
The discussed decision refers to the issue of constitutionality of religious symbols on public property. The Supreme Court ruled that 32-foot tall Latin cross erected nearly a century ago to commemorate soldiers who died in World War I did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Court correctly holds that the religiously expressive monument me be retained for the sake of its historical significance and its place in a common cultural heritage. However, it gives rise to concerns that the Supreme Court set forth a presumption of consti- tutionality for only “longstanding” monuments, symbols, and practices. Similarly, the Court properly emphasizing the nonreligious meaning and functions of the contested cross, at the same time unduly underestimated its religious dimension. There is no need to overlook deeply Christian nature of the cross, when simultane- ously exhibiting its cultural and historical importance.
Źródło:
Forum Prawnicze; 2019, 4 (54); 93-101
2081-688X
Pojawia się w:
Forum Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies