Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896935311

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-237672

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 3

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XII Seiten, Seiten 1102-1670

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part VIII. Imperial unity and imperial co-operation

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. III] THE CONFERENCE OF 1911 1527 of Man, from certain Consular Courts, and the United Kingdom Ecclesiastical Courts. The cases which came before it might involve old French law, Roman Dutch law, the English common law, modified variously by statute in the several Dominions, and the Indian codes, and it was necessary, therefore, to adjust the character of the tribunal to the different classes of cases with which it had to deal. The Judicial Committee included the Lord Chancellor, the four Lords of Appeal, all Privy Councillors who had held high judicial office, two judges with special knowledge of Indian law, and judges not exceeding five in number from the Dominions. In practice the members of the House of Lords and the Judicial Committee were almost identical, and whenever a division of judges between the Courts had to be made he carried out the division himself, and took special care to secure that both Courts were strongly manned. There had never been any difference of decision between the two Courts! although there had been differences of dicta, but such a difference took place between the dicta of members of the House of Lords themselves. Lord Loreburn was of opinion that it would be better if the House of Lords, like the Judicial Committee, delivered but one judgement, but he recognized that a change in the practice of the House of Lords was not possible, and he intimated that if the Dominions preferred that the practice of the Privy Council should be based on that of the House of Lords there would be no difficulty in making the alterations. Moreover, he was quite prepared that the Final Court of Appeal for the Dominions should be constituted in such manner as each Dominion preferred for itself. Did the Dominions desire that Indian judges should sit on appeals from the Dominions ¢ Did they desire that a permanent judge should come from each Dominion to deal with all the appeals or only with the appeals from that Dominion ? It could always be arranged to take all cases from one Dominion at such period as would permit the attendance of a judge * The Court of Appeal and the Judicial Committee have in effect dis. agreed : see Clark, Australian Constitutional Law, pp. 349 seq.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation