3. Compare and Contrast the topic with the position in one of your preferred country.

(Example: if your topic is on independence of judiciary, and you think UK has a better law relating independence of judiciary, then compare the law relating to independence of judiciary between Malaysia and UK.)

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Based on the article ‘towards an effective administration of the justice system and the judges’ expectation lawyers’ will be compare United Kingdom. Both countries are using e-court system, the e-court has been implanted in United Kingdom as well in Malaysia. This began with the computerisation of the courts in 2009 with the introduction of the E-Court System which comprises the Case Management System(CMS), the Queue Management System (QMS), the Court Recording and Transcription (CRT) and the E-filing System. With the E-Court in place, the court has been able to improve their delivery system to the public.

Under the Case Management System, all cases are dealt with actively by the court. Where it is once the duty of the practitioner to transfer the court, to hear their cases, we now assume the task. Each file is a coded and carefully monitored bar to ensure that all inactive files are either removed or not intended for early hearing and disposal.

With case management and tracking systems in place, the case is now ready for trial or hearing before being assigned to a judge. Freed from other duties, judges have now fully focused on the trial with more judicial times. Thus, the case is now expelled by expedition even though not at the expense of justice.

Secondly, Malaysia have established a New Trade Court (NCC) and a New Civil Court (NCvC). These courts are gradually established throughout the country since the last quarter of 2009. The NCC and NCvC are the administrative administration of the court administration. The commercial Court is a sub-division of the Queens’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, the major civil court in England and Wales.

Mediation1 made its first sign in the Malaysian Judiciary in July 2010 by issuing the Practice of Practice of the Chief Justice No. 5/2010. The introduction of the mediation attached to the court has proven successful and it serves as an effective alternative method for the disposal of the case by judges and judges. It provides a more flexible case disposal method by judges and a good resolution dispute for litigants. England and Wales are satisfied that its existing arrangements meet the requirements of article 4 of the Mediation Directive compelling EU member states to put in place quality control mechanisms for the provision of mediation services. The UK has notified the European Commission that it already complies with article 5 of the Mediation Directive (encouraging mediation when proceedings are in progress) through the CPR. The CPR 1.4(2)(e) requires the court to engage in active management of cases, which includes appropriate encouragement of alternative dispute resolution procedures, especially mediation. 

The preparing of lawyers is of most extreme significance so as to accomplish the most noteworthy standard of the legal practice and the profession. “Grooming” in my view would require the preparation of youthful lawyers to end up plainly an equipped, dependable, reliable and proficient officer of the court.

 

Good lawyers come to court well prepared. Preparation is the most difficult part of being a lawyer. lawyer should marshal the facts of the case well in advance and know the law applicable to the case before the trial commences.

The Judiciary in recent years has introduced specialized courts such as the Commercial Court, the Admiralty Court, the Intellectual Property Court, the Corruption Courts and the Environmental Court. In 2013, the Court of Appeal was introduced at the High Court which commenced operations in Kuala Lumpur and Shah Alam. The establishment of the Convention Court is at the request of the construction industry to enable the disposal of rapid construction cases.

There is a different legal system between Malaysian and United Kingdom.

Firstly, Malaysia have a written constitution and the word “law” has to be given a wider meaning. It should include the constitution itself, any written law and by definition should also include the common law of England in so far as it is applicable in Malaysia, any custom or usage having the force of law. Under art. 4 of the Federal Constitution, it is declared that the Constitution is the supreme law of the federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with the Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency be void.

It is incumbent upon both the Legislature (Parliament and State Legislative Assembly) and the Executive to act within the bounds of the power conferred by the Constitution or by any written law under which it purports to act. Thus, any act of the Executive or any law passed by the Legislature may be challenged in court if it exceeds the authority as conferred by the Constitution. Parliament for instance, could not enact law relating to matters in theState Lists and nor could the state legislature enact law on matters in the Federal Lists.

 

 

 

The UK has an unwritten constitution in that there is no single written document that sets out the rights of individual citizens and how the Government should act. The UK constitution is comprised of a variety of sources, some of which are written (such as statutes) and others (such as constitutional conventions), which are unwritten (see Question 10).

The constitution is unitary in that the Parliament in Westminster is the supreme law-making authority. Since 1999, devolution has provided for the transfer of powers from the Westminster Parliament to assemblies in Cardiff (Wales) and Belfast (Northern Ireland), and the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. However, other law-making bodies, such as the devolved assemblies or local authorities, derive their law-making authority from powers that they have been granted by the Parliament in Westminster.

Constitutional conventions are an important non-legal and unwritten source of the constitution. Constitutional conventions may be defined as: “…rules of constitutional behaviour which are considered to be binding upon those who operate the constitution but which are not enforced by the law courts…nor by the presiding officers in the House of Commons” (Marshall and Moodie, Some Problems of the Constitution). An example of a constitutional convention is that the monarch always gives Royal Assent to a bill, if advised to do so by the Prime Minister.

As constitutional conventions are “non-legal” they do not require a procedure for their creation. If they become obsolete, they can be dispensed with without any formal step being taken.

References

1 Ani Munirah Mohamad, “Prospects and Challenges Facing E-Court System in Malaysia”, www.allfreeessays.co. (accessed on 26/4/2011).

 2 Joost Breuker, Abdullatif Elhag, Emil Petkov, and Radboud Winkels, “IT Support for the Judiciary: Use of Ontologies in the e-Court Project”, http://www.intrasoft-intl.com/e-court (accessed on 25/4/2011).

3 E-court: The Online justice system – How it Work” online: http://www.ecourt.co.uk/ (accessed on 19/4/2011)

4 Australian Industrial Relations Commission: Report by Senior Deputy President Lacy – Singapore Subordinate Courts” online: http://www.e-airc.gov.au/singaporecourts/ (accessed on 19/4/2011)

 

 

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 https://gettingthedealthrough.com/area/54/jurisdiction/65/mediation-2017-england-wales/ – mediation