{"title":"少数人判决在司法决策中的重要性:司法和宪制发展部长诉普林斯案分析","authors":"Amanda Spies","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Dissent plays an important role in judicial decision-making and can have a far-reaching impact on the development of law. It is therefore important to analyse the role that dissenting judgments plays in legal decision-making and question how dissenting arguments influence the functioning of a court and, in this instance, specifically the Constitutional Court. This case note analyses the judgment in Prince v President, Cape Law Society (2002) and traces how the dissenting judgment became the majority decision in Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince (2018). The case note highlights the need for contextual evidence in judicial decision-making and its importance in understanding the wider impact legal decisions might have.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":"35 1","pages":"429 - 440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The importance of minority judgments in judicial decision-making: an analysis of Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Spies\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Dissent plays an important role in judicial decision-making and can have a far-reaching impact on the development of law. It is therefore important to analyse the role that dissenting judgments plays in legal decision-making and question how dissenting arguments influence the functioning of a court and, in this instance, specifically the Constitutional Court. This case note analyses the judgment in Prince v President, Cape Law Society (2002) and traces how the dissenting judgment became the majority decision in Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince (2018). The case note highlights the need for contextual evidence in judicial decision-making and its importance in understanding the wider impact legal decisions might have.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"429 - 440\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal on Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2019.1703558","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
异议在司法决策中发挥着重要作用,对法律的发展有着深远的影响。因此,重要的是要分析持不同意见的判决在法律决策中所起的作用,并质疑持不同意见如何影响法院的运作,在这种情况下,尤其是宪法法院的运作。本案例说明分析了Prince诉President,Cape Law Society(2002)一案的判决,并追溯了司法和宪法发展部长诉Prince(2018)一案中反对判决如何成为多数裁决。案例说明强调了在司法决策中需要背景证据,以及其在理解法律裁决可能产生的更广泛影响方面的重要性。
The importance of minority judgments in judicial decision-making: an analysis of Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince
Abstract Dissent plays an important role in judicial decision-making and can have a far-reaching impact on the development of law. It is therefore important to analyse the role that dissenting judgments plays in legal decision-making and question how dissenting arguments influence the functioning of a court and, in this instance, specifically the Constitutional Court. This case note analyses the judgment in Prince v President, Cape Law Society (2002) and traces how the dissenting judgment became the majority decision in Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince (2018). The case note highlights the need for contextual evidence in judicial decision-making and its importance in understanding the wider impact legal decisions might have.