1 The Privy Council Office (PCO)

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-28
Author(s):  
Greg Fyffe
Keyword(s):  
Privy Council

The Caribbean Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta ◽  
Mikael Rask Madsen
Keyword(s):  
Privy Council ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Caribbean Community ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Sociopolitical Context ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Court Of Appeal

This chapter analyzes the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the creation of which was regarded as the culmination of the Caribbean’s long and protracted process toward independence from its former colonizers. Formally, the CCJ was instantaneously empowered to hear cases involving Caribbean Community law (Community law). The CCJ was also empowered to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) in London—a last court of appeal for civil and criminal cases from the Caribbean and the most visible remnant of the British Empire’s former rule. The CCJ’s unique double jurisdiction—original over Community law and appellate over other civil and criminal matters—underscores the complex sociopolitical context and transformation of which it is a part. Ultimately, the CCJ’s growing authority has increasingly made the Court the institutional intersection for the convergence of these two different paths toward establishing the Caribbean as a legally integrated regional unity.

Privy council judgment: Liddell v. Westerton

1874 ◽  
Vol s5-II (34) ◽  
pp. 157-157
Author(s):  
Charles F. S. Warren
Keyword(s):  
Privy Council

Exclusive jurisdiction clauses in international trust deeds

Legal Studies ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Ardavan Arzandeh
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Contentious Issue

Abstract Jurisdiction clauses commonly feature in high-value international contracts. Recently, these clauses are also increasingly utilised in international trust instruments. At common law, a contentious issue vis-à-vis exclusive jurisdiction clauses in trust deeds has been whether they should be upheld in the same way as their contractual equivalents. In obiter remarks in Crociani v Crociani, in 2014, the Privy Council stated that these clauses should be afforded less weight in trusts than in contracts. However, as this paper seeks to demonstrate, the reasoning underpinning the treatment of exclusive jurisdiction clauses in trust deeds in this manner is questionable. The paper's key contention is that exclusive jurisdiction clauses in trust deeds should be enforced in the same way as those in contracts. Accordingly, an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a trust instrument should be upheld, unless the claimant can establish a strong cause why the matter should be litigated elsewhere.

Parliament, Privy Council, and Local Politics in Elizabethan England: The Yarmouth-Lowestoft Fishing Dispute

1990 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Dean
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
Local Politics ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Henry Viii ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Clearing House ◽  
Royal Court ◽  
Major Exception ◽  
The Government

In his celebrated presidential addresses to the Royal Historical Society between 1974 and 1976 Sir Geoffrey Elton explored three “points of contact” between central authority and local communities: Parliament, the royal council, and the royal court. Parliament, he argued, was “the premier point of contact,” which “fulfilled its functions as a stabilizing mechanism because it was usable and used to satisfy legitimate and potentially powerful aspirations.” Elsewhere Elton, and other parliamentary historians such as Michael Graves, Norman Jones, and Jennifer Loach, have stressed parliament's role as a clearing house for the legislative desires of the governing class. The author of this article has recently drawn attention to the pressures which private legislation placed on the parliamentary agenda and the attempts by the government to control it. All of this supports Elton's contention that parliament, from the perspective of central government, was indeed a vital means of ensuring stability and channelling grievances.However, few studies have viewed parliament from the perspective of the local communities and governing elites who sought parliamentary solutions to their problems or even parliamentary resolutions to their disputes with others. The major exception to this has been London. Helen Miller's seminal study of London and parliament in the reign of Henry VIII and Edwin Green's on the Vintners lobby, have been recently complemented by Ian Archer's on the London lobbies in Elizabeth's reign, Claude Blair's on the Armourers lobby, and my own study of the struggle between the Curriers and Cordwainers. These not only reveal the broader context of such disputes, but emphasize that parliament was only one of many arenas available to participants. This important point has also been stressed by Robert Tittler in his study of parliament as a “point of contact” for English towns.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document