Skip to main content

Rule of Law

 Rule of law

These set of words are coming from French quote

‘La principle de legalite’ In English means government based on the principles of law

In the ancient times the kings used to rule their district or state and the rules and principles used to

be fully based on their fantasies and their own mindset .Today’s government can’t do the same .

There is a organised procedure to set rules for the public of country and government has limited

powers delegated to them.

There are certain laws which controls the administration way of functioning-

Some of the major theories that come under rule of law.When it comes to rule of law the first names

that strikes a mind should be Sir Edward Coke and A V Dicey ,they are the major two people who

have finely defined rule of law and have certain theories-

Sir Edward Coke Laid down certain points

1- rule of law is required to ensure That there is no authoritarian rule of the crown

2- that there shall not exist any arbitrary authority of the government

3- to ensure the Rights of individuals

Rule of law are basically legal safeguards provided to the public of India so that their rights are not

exploited or none of the citizens of the country are left rights deprived.

Some of the objects of rule of law based on Sir Edward Coke theory-

1 - To put a restriction on the government of the country from authoritarian rule

2- to put a restriction on arbitrary authority of the government

3- to put a restriction on discrimination when it comes to application of law and order and to

promote equal application of law and order

4-To do things in legally right way

5-to protect the rights of individuals and leave none of the citizen right deprived

6-To make realise that law is supreme and even legal has limits

7-and no one is above law everyone is equal in the eyes of law does administrative authority actions

can be questioned by law

A V dicey was a scholar and also had written a book on the same.

Book named introduction to the Law of Constitution published in the year 1885.

His mindset and sayings on the rule of law were that no man is punishable or can be lawfully made

to suffer in body or goods except for distinct breach of law.His basic theory was everyone is equal

And no man shall be punished until the man has breached any law.

AV dicey had three major subrules-


- Supremacy of law - Even the government is subject to law of the land , there is no exception when

it comes to implementation of law

- Equality before law- Rights and laws won’t be different for different class of people or different cast

of people. Rights and laws would be a birth right and Laws would be Same for everyone . No man

shall be punished less or high on the basis of the place they come from, it would be same

punishment for same offence for everyone .

- Pre-dominance of legal spirit - every person will get their fundamental rights ,free access to courts

,will have the right to fight for justice and right of personal life.


Rule of law – Indian constitution

Constitution is supreme than Parliament ,executive and judiciary. Article 14 of the Constitution says

equality before law and equal protection of law. Fundamental rights which article 13, 14, 15, 19, 21,

22, 25, 28 and 30 A

Remedies to fundamental rights article 32 and 226.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more