The author focuses this Article upon the aspect of the Saikewicz decision which determines that the kind of "proxy consent" question involved in that case requires for its decision "the process of detached but passionate investigation and decision that forms the ideal on which the judicial branch of government was created." This aspect of the decision has drawn much criticism from the medical c...

INTRODUCTION Ireland has an individualised system of sentencing in which judges exercise a relatively broad sentencing discretion. Since the foundation of the State in 1922 few attempts have been made to change or challenge the nature of the Irish sentencing system. This lack of reform, however, does not necessarily reflect widespread satisfaction with the system as a whole. Indeed, a recurrent...

Antitrust law has been characterized as godfather to competition in health care, as landmark cases removed professional restraints of trade and challenged anticompetitive joint ventures and networks that had inhibited market approaches. More recently, antitrust may seem more like an absentee father, as unchecked consolidation over the past fifteen years resulted in markets with dominant provide...

The judiciary needs to be independent of outside influence, particularly from political and economic powers. But judicial independence does not mean that judges and court officials should have free rein to behave as they please. Indeed, judicial independence is founded on public trust, and to maintain it, judges must uphold the highest standards of integrity. This chapter focuses on the account...

This thesis examines the factors that influence perceptions of judicial corruption. A statistical analysis using data from such sources as Transparency International, the World Bank, and Freedom House demonstrates that aspects of accountability (the ability to remove judges) and transparency (freedom of the press) are only weakly related to perceptions of judicial corruption. A systematic count...

We challenge the prevalent claim that courts can only influence policy by adjudicating disputes. Instead, we theorize shadow effect of : makers preemptively altering policies in anticipation possible judicial review. While American studies imply preemptive reforms hinge on litigious interest groups pressuring who support review, advance a comparative theory flips these presumptions. In less and...