Programação
-
In this class, we will discuss a short but immensely relevant opinion from the NY Court of Appeals. Babcock v. Jackson (12 N.Y.2d 473 (1963)) is widely regarded as having brought about a Copernican revolution to US conflict of laws, with repercussions in many other countries' jurisdictions.
-
Georgia W. Babcock, Appellant,
v
Mabel B. Jackson, as Executrix of William H. Jackson, Deceased, Respondent.Court of Appeals of New York
Argued January 23, 1963
Decided May 9, 1963 -
Brief advice (pun intended) and some resources to help you brief cases.
-
Ver Fazer um envio
You are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Babcock v. Jackson case.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion.
You have to submit your case brief via Moodle before class. Late submissions will be penalized and will be accepted only within a week of the due date. I recommend you to compose your brief in a word processor, then copy/paste it here in Moodle; most formatting will be transferred automatically, but it is wise to keep it to a minimum.
Last but not least: if you search correctly, you'll certainly find online pre-prepared briefs of this and most other cases we'll discuss during this semester. Given that briefing is a tool to deepen your understanding of the case and of Law in general, it goes without saying that I strongly advise you not to do it and write your briefs yourself. This may be daunting at first, but you'll get the hang of it eventually.
-
-
Permanent Court of International Justice
J. August, 17th, 1923
Publications of the PCIJ - Series A - A01
-
Ver Fazer um envio
You are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Merits of the S.S. Wimbledon affair.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion.
You have to submit your case brief via Moodle before class. Late submissions will be penalized and will be accepted only within a week of the due date. I recommend you to compose your brief in a word processor, then copy/paste it here in Moodle; most formatting will be transferred automatically, but it is wise to keep it to a minimum.
-
Permanent Court of International Justice
J. September, 7th, 1927
Publications of the PCIJ - Series A - A10
-
Ver Fazer um envio Receber uma nota
For this week's assignment you are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Case of the S.S. Lotus.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion. You will not have to analyse the case in the brief, but in order to facilitate discussion in class, you should be prepared to evaluate the Court's decision. For this, a reading of the dissenting opinions will be very useful as reference to them will be made in class.
You have to submit your case brief via Moodle before class. Late submissions will be penalized, and will be accepted only within a week of the due date.
-
International Court of Justice
J. April, 9th, 1949
I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 4
-
For this week's assignment you are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Corfu Channel Case. In order to facilitate discussion, we will deal with it as two separate decisions, one regarding the claims advanced by the United Kingdom against Albania, and the other on the claims advanced by Albania against the United Kingdom. For the next class, you are required to present the brief of the decision regarding the facts that took place in October, 22, 1946.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion. In addition, you are required to present an analysis of the opinion: Has the Court correctly applied the law? Is the Court's reasoning sound? Do you agree with the Court's holding (or holdings) in this case?
You have to submit your case brief via Moodle before class. Late submissions will be penalized, and will be accepted only within a week of the due date.
-
For this week's assignment you are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Corfu Channel Case. In order to facilitate discussion, we will deal with it as two separate decisions, one regarding the claims advanced by the United Kingdom against Albania, and the other on the claims advanced by Albania against the United Kingdom. For the next class, you are required to present the brief of the decision regarding the facts that took place in November 1946.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion. In addition, you are required to present an analysis of the opinion: Has the Court correctly applied the law? Is the Court's reasoning sound? Do you agree with the Court's holding (or holdings) in this case?
You have to submit your case brief via Moodle before class. Late submissions will be penalized, and will be accepted only within a week of the due date.
-
International Court of Justice
J. April, 6th, 1955
I.C.J. Reports 1955, p. 4
-
Ver Fazer um envio
For this semester´s evaluation you are required to brief the Court's majority opinion on the Nottebohm Case.
I expect you to show that you can identify the main facts of the case, the legal issue in question, the rule or rules applied by the Court, and the reasoning by which the Court arrived at its conclusion.
In addition, don't forget that you are required to present an analysis of the opinion: Has the Court correctly applied the law? Is the Court's reasoning sound? Do you agree with the Court's holding (or holdings) in this case?
You have until June, 29th, to submit your work.
-
-
-
-
-