<span>An address to the public announcing plans for a military intervention is most likely to employ idealism.</span>
This question is a bit silly but I think it would be an African American single parent.
Direct democracy and pure democracy are the same thing. All decisions are based and voted on by the people.
Someone who moves from place to place is called a nomad
Explanation:
Law does not function in vacuum. Law operates for and in the society; and it is influenced by the mores and attitudes of the society. Correspondingly, law is an instrument of social change. The law thus never can be static; it has to change constantly with the changes in the society. Judiciary plays a major role for this change since judges interpret and redefine the laws through their judicial decisions. The demands of the time and society become prominent factors for judge in the law interpretation process. Their judicial opinions consequently become precedents - 'settled' or 'established' law that can provide legal foundation for settling subsequent cases. Hence, those who are associated in the field of law have to read case judgments for their research or academic purposes.
Mere knowledge of legal rules is not enough to do research in law. It also needs the analytical skills to extract ratio, observation and to apply these principles in different factual situations. This paper endeavors to identify certain parameters, which by no means are exhaustive but are only enabling points which could help a researcher to read and understand the judicial opinion. To achieve the very purposes of reading, the yardstick is not mere the ability to read, but to comprehend very essence of what is written.
The author believes that when a judgment is written well with clarity and consistency, even a common man would be able to figure out the contours of law. Since the objective of any judgment or judicial opinion is justice, the judge's conveying skill and the reader's skill ought to converge upon a common end.
