Law · Legal Information · Justice
 

Judicial Branch

A branch of government; judges.

Members of courts of law; a special independent group of people tasked within the constitution of a nation, with the resolution of disputes in regards to the constitution or any other law, or the interrelation thereof, and in regards to any private disputes in regards to the entitlements of persons under the laws as set by the legislative branch as well as the hearing and sentencing of any person of whom the executive branch, on behalf of the government, has alleged the commission of a crime.

The judicial branch of government have the following features:

  • Independence;
  • Sole authority to issue opinions binding on all, on the constitution and laws; and
  • Authority to hear cases not only between persons, but between persons and the government (aka state) and thus, the authority to render binding decisions in regards to government actions.

In a Canadian case, Fraser v Canada, the Supreme Court wrote:

"In broad terms, the role of the Judiciary is, of course, to interpret and apply the law; the role of the Legislature is to decide upon and enunciate policy (through law); the role of the Executive is to administer and implement that policy."

Also called the “judicature” as in the heading of §71 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act which continues:

“The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Supreme Court, to be called the High Court of Australia….”

As an example of a constitutional provision creating an independent judiciary, Article III of the US Constitution:

“The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish….
“The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; to controversies between two or more states; between a state and citizens of another state; between citizens of different states; between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.”

REFERENCES:

 Fraser v Canada 1985 2 SCR 455

Latest LagMag headlines:

Banning the Use of Hand-Held Cell Phones While Driving

What is with banning hand-held cell phone use while driving that's so difficult for law-makers? Maybe this will help: The Emperor has no clothes! The Emperor has no clothes!

Birthday Legal Information Ramblings

It only takes two psychiatrists to lock someone away. Birthday or not, here's enough to find ten.

Politically-Correct Is Dead! Long Live The Truth!

We speaketh prematurely but the lovely knoll of ditching political correctness- sweeter sounding still as it rings from the home of the common law - has been heard and struck a beacon of light upon the shadow of law which naively wants to be all things to all cultures.


Read earlier headlines »
Subscribe to stay in touch »


Switch to variable width

Switch to fixed width

Unless otherwise noted, this article was written by Lloyd Duhaime, Barrister, Solicitor, Attorney and Lawyer (and Notary Public!). It is not intended to be legal advice and you would be foolhardy to rely on it in respect to any specific situation you or an acquaintance may be facing. In addition, the law changes rapidly and sometimes with little notice so from time to time, an article may not be up to date. Therefore, this is merely legal information designed to educate the reader. If you have a real situation, this information will serve as a good springboard to get legal advice from a lawyer.

top