Supreme court ruling on Boris

[veritas]

• Tweet

lol

What I appreciate about a court hierachy in which Parker has raised earlier is that the lowers courts are bound by precedents. Whatever the higher court says regarding points of law i.e. rules, lower courts must follow. The difference in Cases are the material facts e.g. witnesses, evidence etc. but all courts are bound by precedents. Judges can refer to multiple ratios on points of law and obiters but what I appreciate most about the law is its strength to self-correct. For instance if you check out Lexus database on Cases, some are considered strong Cases + sign, some weak, ! sign, it's a tight system. I'm wondering why such a reliable system hasn't been extended to science or medicine. Oh hang on, did I forget to mention courts aren't beholden to publishers.

[Nefertiti]

I am no lawyer but Brexit is one comical circus. The lesson we can get from this ruling and Brexit as Kenyans is the beauty and merit in parliamentary democracy. Across the Atlantic you have Trump running amok. POTUS can make and overturn all kinds of treaties. Boris does not have such leeway and that is a very good thing.

[Nefertiti]

The next British parliament will be dominated by the Brixit Party and the Lib Dems. Labor and the Tories will be crashed.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I am no lawyer but Brexit is one comical circus. The lesson we can get from this ruling and Brexit as Kenyans is the beauty and merit in parliamentary democracy. Across the Atlantic you have Trump running amok. POTUS can make and overturn all kinds of treaties. Boris does not have such leeway and that is a very good thing.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

lol

What I appreciate about a court hierachy in which Parker has raised earlier is that the lowers courts are bound by precedents. Whatever the higher court says regarding points of law i.e. rules, lower courts must follow. The difference in Cases are the material facts e.g. witnesses, evidence etc. but all courts are bound by precedents. Judges can refer to multiple ratios on points of law and obiters but what I appreciate most about the law is its strength to self-correct. For instance if you check out Lexus database on Cases, some are considered strong Cases + sign, some weak, ! sign, it's a tight system. I'm wondering why such a reliable system hasn't been extended to science or medicine. Oh hang on, did I forget to mention courts aren't beholden to publishers.

[RV Pundit]

Veritas,
Interesting. The science world operate on just referencing anything - I think medical field probably insist on peer reviewed work - the rest - you just have to reference something published out there. It's a trust system. But I agree there should be a way to rank published researched with + or - - some of them are just worth nothing. MIT or say Harvard university published paper cannot have same rank as UON done paper. Ultimately such a ranking will be controversial but like you also said - science publishing - is a cartel - but very necessary - to weed out pseudoscience.

[veritas]

Wow, I agree with you all.