The Australian Law Reform Commission's "Review of the Adversarial System of Litigation : Rethinking the Federal Civil Litigation System" may have too narrow a reference - paper concerned with the ...place of the inquisitorial system in Australia's system of justice - need for awareness of what is going on overseas in relation to reform of civil procedure.
In this article, Professor Tobias analyzes and attempts to harmonize the conflicting frameworks for civil procedure reform embodied in the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) and its immediate ...predecessor, the Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act of 1988 (JIA). Congress intended the JIA to open the national and local rulemaking processes to public scrutiny and to decrease the use of local rules. Yet Professor Tobias finds the 1990 Act at odds with the earlier measure in several ways. By encouraging local experiments aimed at reducing litigation costs and delay, he argues, the CJRA shifted the locus of rulemaking toward the local level and departed from the tenets of simplicity, uniformity, and trans-substantivity which traditionally have underlaid the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Moreover, he contends, implementation of the CJRA interrupted promising reform processes started under the JIA. Professor Tobias argues that we can combine the best of the JIA and CJRA by fostering limited local experimentation while achieving most procedural revisions through notice and comment rulemaking at the national level.
So far, civil justice reform has occurred mainly at the federal, rather than at the state level, although the vast majority of lawsuits are filed in state courts. In this article, Professor Sherman ...argues that states, with their broad substantive authority and general jurisdiction, may be fertile ground for efforts to reduce litigation costs and delay. He recommends that states convene broad-based civil justice commissions composed of jurists, lawyers, and litigants and that these groups focus on four key areas: judicial administration, case-management techniques, alternatives to trial, and early incentives to settle. Drawing on models and proposals from the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990, current state-level reform efforts, and other sources, Professor Sherman highlights the major issues and ideas likely to occupy state policymakers under each of these headings.
The Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) represents an unprecedented attempt by Congress to address perceived problems of excessive cost, congestion, and delay in the federal courts. In this ...article, Senator Biden, a primary architect of the CJRA, argues that Congress shares with the judiciary a constitional duty to ensure all Americans an adequate federal forum in which to obtain justice. Describing the CJRA as an appropriate and promising beginning, Senator Biden argues that Congress has a continuing responsibility to help control the federal caseload. In particular, he offers a framework for analyzing proposals to expand federal jurisdiction which seeks to limit such jurisdiction to strong federal interests while maintaining the historic role of the federal courts in protecting basic rights.
History of the Juvenile Justice Bill - consultation process used by Queensland government shows a major gulf between official rhetoric and practice - lack of public participation in the law-making ...process.
As chapter 1 of this book suggests, the American legal system is unique in countless ways. Its system of civil procedure is no exception. Practices such as pleading rules and discovery norms set ...America apart from many foreign countries, including our common-law cousins. Over a decade ago, these differences prompted John Langbein to observe:
Americans operate a system of civil procedure whose excesses make it a laughing stock to the rest of the civilized world. Our system is truth-defeating, expensive, and capricious—a lawyers’ tax on the productive sector. Some Americans do not want to admit the dimensions of our
In 1894, the federal government of Canada legislated its first separate juvenile court. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, separate courts were beginning to be developed in the country. ...Another focus was on reforming youths who committed criminal offenses and perhaps an early articulation of status offenders, although this covered only girls under 13 and boys under 12 in Ontario. The most well-known and comprehensive legislation — designed to bring youths in youth court not only for federal (criminal) offenses, but also for violation of provincial and municipal by-laws — was passed in 1908. This was the Juvenile Delinquents Act. Youth justice reforms were more seriously entertained by the government during the 1960s and 1970s. This chapter discusses juvenile justice reform in Canada aimed at preventing delinquency among adolescent girls. It looks at various laws passed to achieve this objective, including the Young Offenders Act (1984–2003) and the Youth Criminal Justice Act (2002). It also, compares legislative developments related to youth justice in Canada and the United States.
The Babel criminal justice system - factors restricting the improvement in quality of criminal justice administration in Australia - unpredictable demands on criminal justice resources - limited ...information about the flow of demand for service between criminal justice agencies - inadequate attention to the outcomes of investment in law enforcement, sentencing and correctional policy - management strategies.
