Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Judge
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Aktywność sądu i przewodniczącego składu orzekającego w postępowaniu przed sądem karnym I instancji

100%
Trybuchowska E.
Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne
|
2011
|
vol. IX
93-112
EN
Equipping the court with the possibility of an active conduct is a derivative of the standpoint assuming that the penal procedure – as an institution of the public law – justifies the duty to take into account in it not only the private interest, but – primarily – interests of the administration of justice and society. The activity of the court manifests itself through managing a court hearing, the initiative in the sphere of dealing with evidence, running proceedings to take evidence, including examination. The manner of presiding over a hearing, like the remaining elements of the court’s activity, should – however – guarantee a sufficient scope for initiative of the parties and offer them a full possibility to express their own standpoint in the trial. Otherwise, it can become an element limiting the contradictoriness of the court hearing. The court of law and the president of the adjudication board safeguard that a dispute is run on the basis of legal regulations. The legislator imposes a special duty on the president of the adjudication board to see to it that the hearing is run in compliance with the regulations of proceedings and that the goal it serves is reached. The court, being one of the subjects in criminal proceedings, as regards the scope of establishing the factual state of the case appears both in the character in which its position stands close to those of the other subjects and in yet another character that is typical of itself exclusively: it is the subject that conducts proceedings to take evidence and then evaluates the results of the proceedings Thus, it depends on the degree of court’s activity in this respect whether, in a given case, it means a contentious procedure in its classic framework or an investigative proceeding with limited contradictoriness. In the case of effective and active role of the prosecution and the defence, an exhaustive carrying out of proceedings to take evidence, there is little space left for the court’s activity within the sphere of proceeding to take evidence. In consequence of the latter, the court will be able to concentrate on the proper evaluation and settling of the case. A reverse situation can result in ‘pushing’ the court into one direction, which – in compliance with the principles in force regarding penal procedure – should not happen. The regulations of the code of penal procedure make a contradictory dispute possible, they only have to be used in an appropriate way.
2
Content available remote

Mravní jistota jako princip soudního rozhodnutí

75%
Kašný J.
Studia theologica
|
2019
|
vol. 2
123-133
EN
The article examines the requirement of moral certitude in a judicial decision in canon law according to canon 1608 of the Code of Canon Law of 1983. It opens with the Papal Allocutions of Pope Pius XII and Pope John Paul II. It analyses and comments on canon 1608 which rules moral certitude as a principle of the canonical sentence. It consequently examines various aspects of the process of reaching moral certitude, especially the process of collecting and evaluating the proofs, the right of defense of the parties to the process, and the obligation of the judge to appraise the proofs according to the judge’s own conscience. Finally, it concludes that the way to reach a sentence based on moral certitude is quite specific, corresponding to human decision-making before God, and at the same time, is a principle of decision-making in the context of human reason, freedom and responsibility. Moral certitude does not exclude any possibility of judicial error but does exclude every serious and positive doubt about the matter to be decided by the sentence.
3
Content available remote

Výkon soudní moci v olomoucké arcidiecézi v letech 1917–1948

63%
Menke M.
Studia theologica
|
2013
|
vol. 15
|
issue 4
87-102
EN
This article deals with issues related to the activities of the ecclesiastical court in Olomouc in the canonic-legal, historical, religious-political context over the years 1917–1948. The Ecclesiastical Court is the institution through which the diocesan bishop (in this case, the Archbishop of Olomouc) habitually carries out his judicial power. Judicial power is this part of the power of governance in the Church by which the rights of physical or juridic persons are vindicated, juridic facts are declared and the penalty for delicts are imposed or declared. The judicial power, which judges judicial trials, must therefore be exercised in the manner prescribed by the law. The most frequent causes, which are decided by the ecclesiastical court of the diocese, consist of marriage trials. The Church court of Olomouc underwent numerous changes over the period of its existence which reflected not only the legislative changes in the Church, but also the actual situation within the Bohemian and Moravian Church at this time. The article summarizes not only the execution of the judicial power of the Church in general, but also the personal situation at the court. Tracing the individual types of the cases is more difficult because many archival materials have not been preserved.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.