Legal Ethics最新文献

{"title":"Special issue: the ethics of judicial appointments","authors":"R. Mortensen, Richard F. Devlin","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1348003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1348003","url":null,"abstract":"This special issue of Legal Ethics focuses on the judiciary, with a particular emphasis on the ethics of judicial appointments. The first four articles all emerge from papers delivered in the two s...","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1348003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47481941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rethinking the Lord Chancellor’s role in judicial appointments*","authors":"G. Gee","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2017.1345085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1345085","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The judicial appointments regime in England and Wales is unbalanced. The pre-2005 appointments regime conferred excessive discretion on the Lord Chancellor, but the post-2005 regime has gone much too far in the opposite direction. Today, the Lord Chancellor is almost entirely excluded from the process of selecting lower level judges and enjoys only limited say over the selection of senior judges. In this article I argue that the current regime places too little weight on the sound reasons for involving the minister in individual selection decisions, including the scope for ministerial input to enhance judicial independence, to supply political leadership on judicial diversity and to render more effective the discharge of the Lord Chancellor’s systemic responsibility for the justice system as a whole. I argue that shortlists reconcile the need to more fully involve the Lord Chancellor whilst at the same time ensuring that candidates satisfy a merit threshold.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1345085","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47231724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The ethics and regulation of lawyers worldwide: the seventh international legal ethics conference, New York","authors":"R. Mortensen","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345082","url":null,"abstract":"Outline of biennial International Legal Ethics \u0000Conference (ILEC) held by The International Association of Legal Ethics, at the Fordham University School of Law, New York, from 14 to 16 July 2016. This was the Seventh ILEC and the second to be held in the United States; previous \u0000ILECs have been held in Exeter, England (2004); Auckland, New Zealand (2006); the Gold Coast, Australia (2008); Stanford University, USA (2010);4 Banff, Canada (2012); and London, England (2014).","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345082","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42687595","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Achilles heel of the Canadian judiciary: the ethics of judicial appointments in Canada","authors":"Richard F. Devlin, A. Dodek","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345202","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although the Canadian legal system has many virtues, it has at least one major weakness – its judicial appointments and promotion systems. The paper begins by identifying six key values that need to be considered in order to assess the legitimacy of a judicial appointments process – independence, impartiality, representativeness, transparency, accountability and efficiency. In the following sections, through the use of three case studies of appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada, the superior courts of Nova Scotia and a promotion to the Federal Court of Canada, we demonstrate that Canada has failed to live up to these values. We conclude by suggesting that recent reforms to the judicial appointments processes by the current government are an improvement, but that more radical reforms are essential to enhance public confidence in the integrity of Canada’s judicial appointments and promotion systems.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1345202","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42148670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Legal ethics training between a rock and a hard place in Germany","authors":"Matthias Kilian","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1328759","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1328759","url":null,"abstract":"In the end, the discussion became bizarre. The occasion was 23 March 2017, at the third reading of a bill that proposed to amend the Federal Lawyers’ Act (Bundesrechtsanwaltsordnung), to introduce ...","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1328759","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42909543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"An ‘existential’ shift? Technology and some questions for the legal profession","authors":"P. Kathrani","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2017.1298324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1298324","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Technology is changing the world in which we live and this includes the legal profession. This change has been remarked from many different standpoints. However, as technology is increasingly integrated into the fabric of legal practice, the very act of lawyering is likely to change and this will give rise to very important ethical questions.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1298324","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46870708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Barristers, the Bar Standards Board and the structural bias of appointing disciplinary tribunals in England and Wales","authors":"Zia Akhtar","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292627","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The rule against bias is a central tenet of English law and it also impacts on collegiate courts which typically exercise appellate/review jurisdictions over their professional or student members. This is true of the Bar Standards Board (BSB) which has established the adjudicatory bodies to enforce its regulatory framework and has vested the procedure of fair trials upon the Council of the Inns of Court (‘COIC’) which is responsible for appointing the Disciplinary Tribunal panels that conduct hearings for professional misconduct. The COIC has been exposed for ‘irregularities’ in the findings of guilt against barristers who have been adjudged by non-qualified judges. In R (on the application of Mehey & Ors) v Visitors to the Inns of Court and Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1630, the Court of Appeal ruled that a disciplinary tribunal or a panel of visitors appointed from barristers or lay representatives outside its pool of enrolled judges would still ensure independence and guarantee freedom from outside pressure. The impugned tribunal members who were not entitled to sit nevertheless had authority to act as de facto judges. This part of the ruling reinforces the regulatory bodies inherent power to appoint its own tribunal to adjudicate and it needs a more rigorous application of natural justice principle on the part of the BSB.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292627","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46115439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lawyer self-regulation and the public interest: a reflection","authors":"Richard L. Abel","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1334742","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1334742","url":null,"abstract":"Lawyers in the US and the UK justify their self-regulatory powers as serving the public interest, a claim that prominent sociologists in both countries long credulously accepted. But there are ample reasons for skepticism. Western societies are founded on the belief that individuals are self-interested. Free markets allow them to maximise utility. Free alienability of property ensures it will be put to its best and highest use. The laws of copyright, patent and trade mark protect intellectual property in order to encourage creativity. Meritocratic educational systems motivate students to acquire knowledge and skills. We seek to align the interests of lawyers and clients, for instance, through contingent or conditional fees; because this is not always possible, however, ethical rules require lawyers to avoid conflicts of interest. Liberal democracies allow citizens to shape governmental action through interest group pluralism. The legal system promotes justice by encouraging the adversarial clash of zealous advocates. Laws respect individual autonomy through doctrines of informed consent, the right to die, and privacy. Competition is the driving force behind artistic expression and athletic contests. And our understanding of international relations is dominated by the realist view that every nation does and should pursue its self-interest. Given all this, why expect the legal profession to be different? History documents the self-interest of lawyer self-regulation. The primary challenge for any occupation seeking to become a profession is to control supply. The first task is to restrict the production of producers. Civil law professions, like the notary, achieved the ultimate protection: a numerus clausus (in which positions often were handed down from father to son). Common lawyers had to use other devices. As Weber noted, examinations became the dominant entry barrier in the twentieth century. These have an unproven – and arguably dubious – relationship to the knowledge lawyers actually utilise in their daily practice (in the language of psychologists: they have never been validated). Let me offer some exotic","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1334742","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42888118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Partisan judicial speech and recusal procedure","authors":"Dmitry Bam","doi":"10.1080/1460728X.2017.1327399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1327399","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728X.2017.1327399","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48148280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pride and prejudice: a case for reform of judicial recusal procedure","authors":"G. Appleby, Stephen P. McDonald","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2017.1261521","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1261521","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Justice must both be done and be seen to be done. A legal principle designed to give effect to this fundamental proposition is that a judge must not sit to determine a dispute if he or she is biased, or if there exists a reasonable perception that he or she is biased. Across many common law jurisdictions – including the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and many jurisdictions in the United States – the judge in question himself or herself is required to undertake the assessment of whether bias, or an apprehension of bias, exists. Drawing on insights from behavioural psychology and a series of case studies from across these jurisdictions, this paper offers an extended analysis of this practice and identifies and evaluates alternative proposals.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1261521","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48823585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}