剥夺的条款!最后的欢呼?

P. Gerber
{"title":"剥夺的条款!最后的欢呼?","authors":"P. Gerber","doi":"10.53300/001C.6665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"[Extract]The effectiveness of privative clauses have bedevilled the common law ever since the Year Books. In recent times, it has been generally accepted that whenever Parliament creates an inferior tribunal, the courts retain an inherent right to supervise and control it, and any person aggrieved by a decision of the tribunal has a right to ask the court to exercise those powers. This article examines whether it is beyond the capacity of the Parliament – both State and Commonwealth – to confer upon an administrative tribunal the power to make authoritative and conclusive decisions as to the limits of its own jurisdiction.","PeriodicalId":306257,"journal":{"name":"Revenue Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Privative Clauses! The Last Hurrah?\",\"authors\":\"P. Gerber\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001C.6665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"[Extract]The effectiveness of privative clauses have bedevilled the common law ever since the Year Books. In recent times, it has been generally accepted that whenever Parliament creates an inferior tribunal, the courts retain an inherent right to supervise and control it, and any person aggrieved by a decision of the tribunal has a right to ask the court to exercise those powers. This article examines whether it is beyond the capacity of the Parliament – both State and Commonwealth – to confer upon an administrative tribunal the power to make authoritative and conclusive decisions as to the limits of its own jurisdiction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":306257,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revenue Law Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revenue Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001C.6665\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revenue Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001C.6665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自《年鉴》出版以来,剥夺条款的效力一直困扰着普通法。最近,人们普遍认为,每当议会设立一个下级法庭时,法院都保留监督和控制它的固有权利,任何对法庭的决定感到不满的人都有权要求法院行使这些权力。本文审查议会- -无论是州议会还是联邦议会- -是否有能力赋予行政法庭就其本身的管辖范围作出权威性和结论性决定的权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Privative Clauses! The Last Hurrah?
[Extract]The effectiveness of privative clauses have bedevilled the common law ever since the Year Books. In recent times, it has been generally accepted that whenever Parliament creates an inferior tribunal, the courts retain an inherent right to supervise and control it, and any person aggrieved by a decision of the tribunal has a right to ask the court to exercise those powers. This article examines whether it is beyond the capacity of the Parliament – both State and Commonwealth – to confer upon an administrative tribunal the power to make authoritative and conclusive decisions as to the limits of its own jurisdiction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信