Repository landing page

We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.

American discussion concerning differing views of court decision

Abstract

Zákon č. 226/2000 Z.z. stanovil s účinnosťou od 1. augusta 2000 nasledovné znenie § 32 ods. 1 zákona č. 38/1993 Z.z. o Ústavnom súde Slovenskej republiky: "Sudca, ktorý nesúhlasí s rozhodnutím pléna alebo se­nátu ústavného súdu alebo s ich odóvodnením, má prá­ vo, aby sa jeho odlišné stanovisko pripojilo k rozhod­nutiu. Odlišné stanovisko sudcu sa uverejňuje rovnako ako ostatné časti rozhodnutia."The paper is a summary of arguments presented in the U.S. legal discussion on separate judicial opinion­ writing. The notion of separate opinions include the so called dissenting and concurring opinions: the former express disagreement with the result of a majority de­cision, the latter disagreement only with its reasoning. (Within the text, the term "dissent" is sometimes used as referring to separate opinions in general.

Similar works

Full text

thumbnail-image

Masaryk University Journals / Časopisy Masarykovy univerzity

redirect
Last time updated on 17/10/2019

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.