Features

What happens when the judiciary in young democracies seeks to apply result-orientated judgments to the emotional evaluation of a particular case? South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal has had to deal with two such cases. David Wurtzel reports on Mr Justice Harms’ speech to CEBA.  

When does judging become irrational? When it reaches a conclusion and then looks for the reasons to justify it. On 8 June Mr Justice Harms, the Deputy President of South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”), gave a speech to the Commonwealth in England Barristers’ Association (“CEBA”) on how creative judging or result-orientated judgments—ie reaching a conclusion and then looking for the reasons to justify it—has been used in an emerging democracy with reference to two specific cases before the SCA. The following is an extract from his speech. 

“Have you embellished your evidence?” Joyce Plotnikoff and Richard Woolfson, the authors of Measuring up?, examine the challenges of questioning young witnesses at court 

The involvement of the private sector in the government’s fight against fraud is welcome, but significant dangers—for both victims and the criminal justice system—lurk below the surface, warns Jonathan Fisher QC 

Shelley White sets out the revised guidance on court attire.  

14 August 2009: Do what we can, summer will have its flies — Emerson 

Name: Joanna Poulton
Position: Chief Executive
Chambers: Landmark Chambers 

Tim Kevan
Bloomsbury, August 2009
£11.99 (Paperback) 

Sentencing judges are obliged to make their own enquiries before sentencing a defendant with special needs to prison. John Cooper analyses the recent case law 

Name: Peter Rouse
Position: Director
Company: Bar Select 

“Getting on Board”, a charity who places professionals on the governance board of local organisations, has seen a surge in applicants from the Bar. Paul Rand explains what new trustee volunteers can expect