Criminal proceedings, it is often now said, ought to be conducted with integrity. But what, exactly, does it mean for criminal process to have, or to lack, 'integrity'? Is integrity in this sense merely an aspirational normative ideal, with possibly diffuse influence on conceptions of professional responsibility? Or is it also a juridical concept with robust institutional purchase and enforceable practical consequences in criminal litigation? The 16 new essays contained in this collection, written by prominent legal scholars and criminologists from Australia, Hong Kong, the UK and the USA, engage systematically with - and seek to generate further debate about - the theoretical and practical significance of 'integrity' at all stages of the criminal process. Reflecting the flexibility and scope of a putative 'integrity principle', the essays range widely over many of the most hotly contested issues in contemporary criminal justice theory, policy and practice, including: the ethics of police investigations, charging practice and discretionary enforcement; prosecutorial independence, policy and operational decision-making; plea bargaining; the perils of witness coaching and accomplice testimony; expert evidence; doctrines of admissibility and abuse of process; lay participation in criminal adjudication; the role of remorse in criminal trials; the ethics of appellate judgment writing; innocence projects; and state compensation for miscarriages of justice.

In EU consumer law, the rise of Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights - which guarantees the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial - over the past decade has coincided with a wave of crisis-induced litigation. Courts were confronted with large numbers of cases against overindebted consumers. This has prompted many questions on the need for effective judicial protection, for instance in mortgage enforcement and order for payment procedures. This book provides a unique perspective on the role of civil courts at the crossroads of EU fundamental rights, consumer law and access to justice. It examines how the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as civil courts in Spain and the Netherlands, refer to Article 47 in unfair terms cases, where procedural obstacles and inequalities have become particularly visible - especially in Spanish case law. The analysis reveals a divergence between European and national practices and also shows the potential of Article 47, which is often wrongly equated with the principle of effectiveness, in consumer litigation. Effective Judicial Protection in Consumer Litigation makes a vital contribution to the debate on the functions of Article 47 and fundamental rights reasoning in European private law adjudication and is a must read for anyone interested in the application of Article 47 in judicial decision-making.

A systematic and historical treatment of the civil and criminal procedure of Cicero's time. At the same time, the author examines the legal difficulties and contradictions found in Cicero's writings on procedure. With a subject index and index to passages found in Cicero's works. Of value to the student of Roman Law, ciminal and military procedure and law, and the history of European courts.

There are many challenges that national and supranational judges have to face when fulfilling their roles as guardians of constitutionalism and human rights. This book brings together academics and judges from different jurisdictions in an endeavour to uncover the intricacies of the judicial function. The contributors discuss several points that each represent contemporary challenges to judging: analysis of judicial balancing of conflicting considerations; the nature of courts' legitimacy and its alleged dependence on public support; the role of judges in upholding constitutional values in the times of transition to democracy, surveillance and the fight against terrorism; and the role of international judges in guaranteeing globally recognized fundamental rights and freedoms. This book will be of interest to human rights scholars focusing on the issues of judicial oversight, as well as constitutional law scholars interested in comparative perspectives on the role of judges in different contexts. It will also be useful to national constitutional court judges, and law clerks aiming to familiarise themselves with judicial practices within other jurisdictions. Contributors: A. Abat i Ninet, E. Afsah, C. Ayala, A. Barak, O. Bassok, D.T. Bjoergvinsson, W. Hoffmann-Riem, D. Hope, D. Jenkins, H. Krunke, TJ McIntyre, M. Scheinin, B. Tuzmukhamedov, G. Ulfstein, A. Usacka

Despite 15 years of reform efforts, the incarceration rate in the United States remains at an unprecedented high level. This book provides the first comprehensive survey of these reforms and explains why they have proven to be ineffective. After many decades of stability, the imprisonment rate in the United States quintupled between 1973 and 2003. Since then, nearly all states have adopted multiple reforms intended to reduce imprisonment, but the U.S. imprisonment rate has only decreased by a paltry two percent. Why are American sentencing reforms since 2000 been largely ineffective? Are tough mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders the primary reason our prisons are always full? This book offers a fascinating assessment of the wave of sentencing reforms adopted by dozens of states as well as changes at the federal level since 2000, identifying common themes among seemingly disparate changes in sentencing policy and highlighting recent reform efforts that have been more successful and may point the way forward for the nation as a whole. In The Failed Promise of Sentencing Reform, author Michael O'Hear exposes the myths that American prison sentencing reforms enacted in the 21st century have failed to have the expected effect because U.S. prisons are filled to capacity with nonviolent drug offenders as a result of the "war on drugs," and because of new laws that took away the discretion of judges and corrections officials. O'Hear then makes a convincing case for the real reason sentencing reforms have come up short: because they exclude violent and sexual offenders, and because they rely on the discretion of officials who still have every incentive to be highly risk-averse. He also highlights how overlooking the well-being of offenders and their families in our consideration of sentencing reform has undermined efforts to effect real change. Clearly identifies the real reasons that the wave of post-2000 sentencing reform has had minimal impact on reducing national imprisonment rates Explains why reforms must target the excessive sentences imposed on violent and sexual offenders, even though the members of these offender groups are considered "justifiably punished" by long prison terms in the public eye Enables readers to understand why increased consideration for the well-being of offenders and their families is likely a prerequisite to the acceptance of more fundamental changes to the U.S. sentencing system

Winner, 2019 Outstanding Book Award, given by the American Society of Criminology's Division of Policing Section The first in-depth history and analysis of a much-abused policing policy No policing tactic has been more controversial than "stop and frisk," whereby police officers stop, question and frisk ordinary citizens, who they may view as potential suspects, on the streets. As Michael White and Hank Fradella show in Stop and Frisk, the first authoritative history and analysis of this tactic, there is a disconnect between our everyday understanding and the historical and legal foundations for this policing strategy. First ruled constitutional in 1968, stop and frisk would go on to become a central tactic of modern day policing, particularly by the New York City Police Department. By 2011 the NYPD recorded 685,000 'stop-question-and-frisk' interactions with citizens; yet, in 2013, a landmark decision ruled that the police had over- and mis-used this tactic. Stop and Frisk tells the story of how and why this happened, and offers ways that police departments can better serve their citizens. They also offer a convincing argument that stop and frisk did not contribute as greatly to the drop in New York's crime rates as many proponents, like former NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have argued. While much of the book focuses on the NYPD's use of stop and frisk, examples are also shown from police departments around the country, including Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, Newark and Detroit. White and Fradella argue that not only does stop and frisk have a legal place in 21st-century policing but also that it can be judiciously used to help deter crime in a way that respects the rights and needs of citizens. They also offer insight into the history of racial injustice that has all too often been a feature of American policing's history and propose concrete strategies that every police department can follow to improve the way they police. A hard-hitting yet nuanced analysis, Stop and Frisk shows how the tactic can be a just act of policing and, in turn, shows how to police in the best interest of citizens.

The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law is an instructional textbook for attorneys who want to become experts in the field of negligence law. The book provides a comprehensive analysis of the law in a multitude of areas within the field, including the various types of construction accidents, motor vehicle accidents, premises accidents, and more. The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law also provides a detailed roadmap - from intake through trial - to successfully litigating each of these claims and, ultimately, maximizing monetary compensation for accident victims and their families.

In Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42, nine justices of the Supreme Court of England and Wales decided in favour of a restitutionary award in response to an unjust enrichment, despite the illegal transaction on which that enrichment was based. Whilst the result was reached unanimously, the reasoning could be said to have divided the Court. Lord Toulson, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Hodge and Lord Neuberger favoured a discretionary approach, but their mode of reasoning was described as 'revolutionary' by Lord Sumption (at [261]), who outlined in contrast a more rule-based means of dealing with the issue; a method with which Lord Mance and Lord Clarke broadly agreed. The decision is detailed and complex, and its implications for several areas of the law are considerable. Significantly, the reliance principle from Tinsley v Milligan [1994] 1 AC 340 has been discarded, as has the rule in Parkinson v College of Ambulance Ltd [1925] KB 1. Patel v Mirza, therefore, can fairly be described as one of the most important judgments in general private law for a generation, and it can be expected to have ramifications for the application of the illegality doctrine across a wide range of disciplinary areas. Unless there is legislative intervention, which does not seem likely at the present time, Patel v Mirza is set to be of enduring significance. This collection will provide a crucial set of theoretical and practical perspectives on the illegality defence in English private law. All of the authors are well established in their respective fields. The timing of the book means that it will be unusually well placed as the 'go to' work on this subject, for legal practitioners and for scholars.

This book presents a selection of the latest arbitration cases, materials, and commentaries from China. It aims to provide information on the theory and practice of arbitration combined. It is intended to provide readers with a useful resource to guide them when they encounter actual China-related arbitration cases. This book is a valuable resource for all practitioners concerned with international and foreign-related arbitration matters in China, global law firms, companies engaged in multinational business, jurists, and academics.