maxims Of Common Law’ Are Ignored In Family Court

Courts make determinations in law and in equity. By ‘in law’ is meant following a specific law – constitutional law, state law, etc. By ‘in equity’ is meant determining what is ‘fair’ to do where now law specifically rules. An example is determining how to distribute the assets in a divorce among the husband and wife.

Common law refers to the myriad of decisions made by judges and appeals courts. Maxims of Common Law are ‘guiding truths’. Adhering to them helps judges make fairer decisions. They’re ignored in family court determinations since fairness is a wholly secondary issue. This article overviews what these maxims are.

Maxims are absolutely essential to the preservation of rights and fair treatment to all litigants. Maxims:

* represent ‘self-evident’ truth – as mentioned in our Declaration of Independence when it referred to ‘all men’ as being created equal.

* serve to guide judicial determinations in the same way that ‘axioms’ guide the analysis of mathematical determinations

* promotes fair dealing and unbiased justice – a clearly essential issue in the purpose of courts

Courts, primarily established to enforce the principles of common law, are bound by common law rules of equity that should be grounded in the never-changing maxims. This grounding serves to restrain the court’s wanton discretion in equity law determinations.

Examples of Maxims:

Let’s take a look at some examples to see the nature of maxims -as self-evidently fair. Here’s an important one:

*The certainty of a thing arises only from making a thing certain.

This implies that the court should seek clear proof of allegations made against someone and not rule on just the allegations or weakly supported ones. Family court ignores these maxims all the time.

*The safety of the people cannot be judged but by the safety of every individual.

Laws which supposedly protect the safety of some people at the expense of other people’s rights violate this maxim. A clear example of such a violation is present day domestic restraining order laws which are rampantly and unjustly imposed upon so many fathers.

*Law is unjust where it is uncertain or vague in its meaning.

Laws should be clear so that one knows precisely when he’s breaking such a law. Remember the violation of laws brings consequences on those who violate them. Vague laws are considered unconstitutional. An example of vague standard of law is the ‘best interest of the child’ standard – used to unjustly deny fit fathers custody of their children.

*The Burden of Proof lies on him who asserts the fact -not on him who denies it.

This is based on the fact that you can’t prove a negative. Courts that force people to prove a negative are examples of kangaroo courts. Family courts jail fathers when they can’t prove that they don’t have money to pay!

*No one should be believed except upon his oath.

This simply means that anyone who will give testimony must be sworn in. That way he can be charged with perjury – which is a felony (a serious crime) – if he can be found to be intentionally lying. No ‘swearing in’ means no perjury and no penalty for lying.

*Perjured witnesses should be punished for perjury and for the crimes they falsely accuse against him.

This is the bottom line of enforcing honesty in court testimony. Unfortunately perjury is almost never punished -allowing the degradation of court integrity – so obvious in family court.

*Every home is a castle; though the winds of heaven blow through it, officers of the state cannot enter.

This is from English common law which made a man’s home sacrosanct. It should still be true. It requires officers to have warrants to enter a home. A warrant is permission from a judge based on good cause to enter a home.

*No man should profit by his own wrong or, He who does not have clean hands, cannot benefit from the law

This is self-evident. An extreme case is the child that pleads mercy because he’s an orphan – but only because he murdered his parents.

*He who uses his legal rights harms no one.

But, fathers are routinely punished by seeking their rights in family court.

*No one is punished unless for some wrong act or fault.

But forced into the noncustodial status for doing no wrong would be considered punishment by any reasonable person.

*It’s natural that he who bears the charge of a thing, should receive the profits.

If you have all the obligations for something but none of the benefits, then you are a slave.

Fathers who go to family court observe clear violations of these maxims all the time. Such violations mean that there is a tyranny taking place.

Daily Mirror claim important legal costs victory in Naomi Campbell case

The Daily Mirror claimed an important victory yesterday in a ruling from The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The decision is likely to hasten the calls for reform of the rules governing legal costs.

In 2004 The House of Lords found that The Daily Mirror had breached the supermodel’s privacy in an article about her drug addiction. However, the supermodel’s lawyers represented her on the basis of a so called “No Win-No Fee” Agreement. As a result the newspaper had to pay legal costs in the region of 1million, which included a success fee payable to Naomi Campbell’s lawyers. The ECHR has now ruled that the 1million the paper had to pay was too much and that the Daily Mirror’s freedom of expression was violated by the legal costs it had to pay when it lost the privacy case. The newspaper will now consider a claim for compensation with the government.

The government had already published a green paper recently on reforming legal costs. This follows the Review of legal costs by Lord Justice Jackson. One of the main proposals in the recent green paper is that “success fees” will no longer be recoverable from the losing side in litigation.

This ECHR decision is likely to add to the pressure on these reforms going through sooner rather than later. It will also be interesting to see whether any parties involved in litigation seek to use this ruling to attack legal costs bills by arguing they infringe other human rights, such as the right to a fair trial.

Trethowans is a leading regional legal practice in the South of England. Our strong team of lawyers excel in their respective fields led by Commercial Services, Personal Injury and Commercial Property. Our commercial services include; property, corporate and litigation work, intellectual property and e-business/IT, licensing, employment, business recovery and insurance litigation.

Permanent Residence and Student Visa Australia

Australian permanent residence is for those who hold permanent residency visas, but are not citizens of Australia. You may be eligible for a permanent residence if you have lived in Australia for at least 4 years and lived for at least 12 months as permanent residents or in the past six months, completed a professional or trade course in Australia over a period of two academic years. The initial migration visa will be valid for travel for 5 years from the date your application for immigration to Australia is granted. You can enter and leave Australia freely for your period. Individuals seeking permanent residence in Australia have a better chance if they can bring certain professional skills or attributes that are sought after by the Australian government.

Student visa is granted to foreign citizens who want to take advantage of quality education and training system. Visas are granted by the Australian department of immigration and citizenship DIAC. You will be granted a visa if your course is registered on a full-time basis. Student visa are divided into visa subclasses based on the principal course of study in Australia.

The different student visa sub classes include;
1. ELICOS sector student visas (sub class 570)
This visa is for international students who want to study English language intensive courses for overseas students in Australia. 56
2. School sector student visa (sub class 571)
This visa is designed for international students applying to study in Australia and whose main course of study is a primary school course, a secondary school course, including junior and secondary program.

3. Vocational education and training sector visa (subclass 572)
This visa designed for international students applying to study in Australia and whose main course of study is for certificate 1, 2, 3, and 4, diploma or advanced diploma.
4. Higher education sector student visa (sub class 573)
It is for international students applying to study in Australia and whose main course of study is for a bachelor degree, graduate certificate or graduate diploma.
5. Postgraduate research sector student visa (sub class 573)
It is for international students who want to study a masters degree by research or a doctoral degree in Australia.
6. Non-award sector student visa (sub class 575)
It is for students who want to study either a non-award foundation studies course or another full-time course that does not lead to an Australian award in Australia.
7. AUSAID or defense sponsored sector student visa (sub class 576)
It is for students who are sponsored by defense to study a full-time course of any type in Australia.
8. Student guardian visa (sub class 580)
It is designed for the legal custodian or relative of a study visa holder in Australia to accompany the visa holder as a student guardian provided they are less than 18 years of age.

Shocking Secrets Even A California Labor Attorney Does Not Know About It And Computer Overtime

Yes it is true. Many California labor attorneys do not even know the rules for overtime when it comes to IT and Computer Professionals.
If you can spare 2 minutes, you may find out you are entitled to overtime and thousands of dollars in pay from your current or past employers.
For many years, IT professionals in California worked overtime without getting overtime pay. Under California Overtime Laws, for IT professionals it also depends whether the employee falls in the category of exempt or non-exempt status.
Secret 1: The recommendations for the IT employees would be to first check, whether they have written job descriptions which specify exempt/ non-exempt status. It is very wise to have written time records if you are a non-exempt status employee, as per California Overtime Laws. According to California Labor Law Overtime regulations, you are eligible for overtime pay.
Secret 2: The little known California Overtime Laws that entitles IT and Computer Professionals to overtime is Labor Code 515.5. The law can exempt jobs that fall under titles such as systems analyst, computer systems analyst, computer programmer, applications programmer, applications systems analyst/programmer/software engineer, systems engineer and systems specialist. The above mentioned are some of the IT designations that require working in the Information Technology department under Overtime Law in California.
Secret 3: Just because your employer tells you that you are not entitled to overtime, does not mean it is true. Most exemptions require that for an employee to be exempt, he/she must normally exercise discretion and independent judgment in the work. This means the employee has to evaluate probable alternatives and select or even recommend a course of action. The choice has to be made free from the immediate supervision and in regard to vital matters of a business. In California, if employees are non-exempt under Overtime Law in California, but exempt under federal standards, they are non-exempt and certainly entitled to overtime pay with California overtime regulations.
Under Overtime Law in California, if an employee is not salaried, he/she is non-exempt and must receive overtime pay. A salary means the employee gets paid the same amount each pay period despite lack of work or poor work, disciplinary problems or attendance. If an employer deducts from an employees salary for the quantity or quality of work performed, the employee is not salaried and not exempt.
The IT employees exemption is not applicable to several different types of computer employees, such as entry-level positions, trainees or individuals who maintain or repair computer hardware. Like all other exemptions, the employer cant rely on trumped up or untrue job descriptions to avoid liability. Until 2000, there were no exemptions for IT employees (especially under California overtime requirements). Thus, such employees are still entitled to overtime pay. IT employees can recover wages that go back 3-4 years from the filed date and the claims for IT Employee for overtime, can be enormous due to the high salaries.
IT employees who are paid at least $47.81/ hour in 2006 for all hours worked are exempt from overtime pay. Even for employees who are paid the correct salary, they must be paid the correct hourly under labor code 515.5 for all hours worked. IT employees engage in application of systems analysis techniques and procedures or engaged in design, documentation, development, creation, analysis, testing or the modification of computer systems or just a combination of duties are exempt from overtime pay.
If you are a California employee and believe you are owed Overtime or your employer has violated your rights, take action now and talk to an Experienced California Labor Attorney.
By: Lars Sheckton

Do I Need Motor Legal Protection Cover (on my car insurance)

If you’re in an accident that was not your fault, the cost of getting your car repaired is not the only expense that you’ll face. There are numerous additional costs that you might need to consider, such as the cost of phone calls to deal with claims and the financial impact of any essential time off work. These miscellaneous expenses are the ones that are covered by motor legal protection.

What are the benefits from having motor legal protection?

The recovery of costs including (but not exclusively): -Vehicle repair and recovery -Personal injury -Hire vehicle (often unlimited) -Loss of earnings -Policy excess -Medical bills -Legal expenses

Is motor legal protection a legal requirement?

Drivers are not legally required to have motor legal protection, and in fact, a large number of drivers do not have the cover. However, it can be extremely beneficial to invest in motor legal protection to fully shield oneself from all motor-related eventualities.

Consider the following scenario:

Mrs. Davies stops her car at a set of traffic lights. Another car, going too fast, drives into the back of her. The rear of Mrs. Davies’ car is badly damaged and she is injured. Mr. Barnes, the man driving the other car, is at fault. While his insurance will pay for the damage to Mrs. Davies’ car, there are many other expenses that Mrs. Davies will incur. For example she is forced to pay out for the car-towing fees, a hire car until her car is fixed and a considerable policy excess on her car. Her injuries necessitate a visit to the doctor and because she is self-employed, this causes her to lose half a day’s earnings. Mrs. Davies has not got motor legal protection. Uncertain if she is permitted to claim back these expenses and daunted by the prospect of chasing up her claims, she decides not to claim and is left out-of-pocket.

In the above scenario, if Mrs. Davies had motor legal protection she would have felt reassured in knowing that a legal professional would have chased her claims on her behalf, and that her expenses would have been reimbursed, hassle-free.

Why do some people choose not to buy motor legal protection?

Market research suggests that the main reason people do not buy motor legal protection is because they feel it is too expensive, an unnecessary expense that can be spared. This view is somewhat paradoxical considering the amount of money typically paid out by the non-fault party in an accident. Granted, some motor legal protection polices can be unnecessarily expensive with high-commission pushing up the prices. However, if people are prepared to shop around, there are some extremely competitive high-quality, low-cost packages available on the market.

What if you don’t have motor legal protection?

Everybody is entitled to claim back any uninsured losses; however this tends to require a lot of effort. You would personally have deal with every single aspect of your claim and although achievable, it would necessitate a lot of time, patience and determination. The benefit of having motor legal protection makes the process of getting back to the position you were prior to the accident relatively hassle-free. It will make life easier for you as a driver, providing important peace of mind in knowing that your uninsured losses will be recovered in an accident that was not your fault.

Will your insurer sell you motor legal protection?

They may try! Many insurers offer motor legal protection as an optional extra, often under another name such as uninsured loss recovery or legal expenses insurance. It is important to realise that you are not obligated to take them up on their offer. In fact, you’re likely to find that even if you want motor legal protection cover it is cheaper to buy it elsewhere, since most insurance companies charge a premium to add it to your insurance.

It can be easy to see motor legal protection cover as one more unnecessary expense, but the benefits certainly outweigh the cost. To find out more about Motor Legal Protection Cover, visit: https://www.bestpricefs.co.uk/motor-legal-protection