—Yassin Abdalla Abdelkarim, Judge at Sohag Elementary Court, Egypt. LLM Leeds Beckett University, UK.
In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere.
To submit relevant developments for our weekly feature on “What’s New in Public Law,” please email iconnecteditors@gmail.com.
Developments in Constitutional Courts
- The Supreme Court of Japan, in 2023(Ju)1319, ruled:1. the provisions on eugenic operations under the Eugenic Protection Act (Article 3, paragraph (1), items (i) to (iii), Article 10, and Article 13, paragraph (2) of the same Act) are in violation of Article 13 and Article 14, paragraph (1) of the Constitution;2. the legislative act by the Diet members regarding the provisions on eugenic operations are judged to be illegal in terms of the application of Article 1, paragraph (1) of the State Redress Act;3. if it is extremely contrary to the principles of justice and fairness and totally unacceptable to determine that a claim for compensation for loss or damage arising from a tort has been extinguished by the expiration of the period of exclusion prescribed in the second sentence of Article 724 of the Civil Code (prior to the amendment by Act No. 44 of 2017), the court may determine that the assertion on the period of exclusion is impermissible as it constitutes a violation of the principle of good faith or an abuse of rights; and4. it is contrary to the principle of good faith and impermissible as an abuse of rights to assert the period of exclusion prescribed in the second sentence of Article 724 of the same Code.
- The Supreme Court of Korea defined, in Order 2024Mu689 dated June 19, 2024, Irreparable Damage as damage that cannot be compensated by money, except in special circumstances. The determination of whether an urgent need exists to prevent serious loss from the execution of a disposition is made on a specific and individual basis.
- The Supreme Court of Singapore, in Kassimatis, Theodoros KC v Attorney-General and another and another appeal, decided that what amounts to a “special reason” is highly fact-specific, but the court highlighted three points in relation to the Special Reason Stage. First, when determining whether there is a “special reason” to admit foreign counsel, the factors that the court considers should not be the same factors that are referred to in the other two stages. Second, the fact that a case raises issues of public importance, would not, without more, satisfy the special reason requirement. Third, the mere fact that a question of law is complex will not satisfy the Special Reason Stage. If framed appropriately, most, if not, all, constitutional and administrative law questions will have significant complexity to them
- The Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore, in [2024] SGCA 51, dismissed the claimant’s application for permission to file a PACC application because of lack of reasonable grounds.
- The Supreme Court of Appeal in South Africa (SCA), in Hutchinson Wild v Legal Practice Council & Others (956/2023) [2024] ZASCA 180, dismissed an appeal against the judgment of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria (the high court) on the removal of a lawyer from the roll of Advocates.
In the News
- Dems fight to Trump-proof the federal judiciary as they just topped the mark for confirmations set under Trump’s first term, but Senate Democrats are fighting to avoid Trump putting more of a stamp on the judiciary in his second.
- Senate Democrats render a verdict on Supreme Court ethics since Sen. Dick Durbin says justices have lost the trust of American people by failing to disclose gifts and other ethical lapses.
- Judges are increasingly alarmed as Trump’s Jan. 6 clemency decision nears. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan says she has often reassured police officers traumatized by the violence of Jan. 6, 2021, that “the rule of law still applies.”
New Scholarship
- Introduction to cyber jurisprudence, Yassin Abdalla Abdelkarim, International Cybersecurity Law Review
- The Constitution of Hierarchy. Adrian Vermeule. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Populism and Constitution Making Process. Christos Papastylianos. The People’s Constitution.
- Constitutionalising a Right to Abortion: Unveiling its Transformative Potential Amidst Challenges in Europe. Fien De Meyer, Céline Romainville. European Constitutional Law Review, Volume 20, Issue 3.
Calls for Papers and Announcements
- Social and political impacts of intelligent technologies in Africa: This Collection welcomes submissions from scholars around the globe from a wide range of disciplines to address questions related to social and political challenges in Africa, in the face of rapid advancements of intelligent technologies. Deadline: 28 July 2025
- Divisive politics, polarisation and democratic decline: This collection sets out to take a holistic view of what has been termed ‘nasty politics’ and its implications for society and democracy. Deadline: 26 January 2025
- International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice. Towards the Democratization of Knowledge and Practice in Criminology and Criminal Justice: Global Perspectives and Local Realities. Deadline: 15 February 2025
- Law and Humanities. Commemorating the 100th anniversary of publication of Franz Kafka’s The Trial. Deadline: 01 March 2025
Elsewhere Online
- Another Blow to the Sovereign Shield: South Korean Court Rejects Japan’s Sovereign Immunity Defense in “Comfort Women” Case. Daniel Mandell, ASIL Insights.
- Cyber Jurisprudence: A Leap Forward. Yassin Abdalla Abdelkarim, Springer Nature Research Communities.
- Legal Battles Over Nagorno-Karabakh: A Review of the Jurisprudence to Date. Gurgen Petrossian, ASIL Insights.
Comments