Answer:
The Parliament and the courts are separate: Parliament makes statute laws, the courts interpret the law. The judiciary (courts) can also "make" law through interpretations and application of common law.
Explanation:
Courts and parliaments interact in the law-making process. They need to work together so that the law is flexible and can apply to any situation that might arise.
The courts are responsible for settling disputes. Many disputes are settled by the courts by interpreting the words in an Act of parliament. As a secondary role, the courts also occasionally make laws.Parliament is the supreme law-making body. This is also referred to as sovereignty of parliament. Parliament’s main role is to make laws. As a supreme law-making body, parliament can make laws that either confirm or reject laws made by courts, although the Commonwealth Parliament cannot override High Court interpretations of the Commonwealth Constitution. Courts depend on parliament to make the bulk of the law. Parliament depends on courts to apply the law made by parliament and to establish new law on situations that have arisen for the first time.
Answer:
As used in these standards, “prosecutor” means any attorney, regardless of agency, title, or full or part-time assignment, who acts as an attorney to investigate or prosecute criminal cases or who provides legal advice regarding a criminal matter to government lawyers, agents, or offices participating in the investigation or prosecution of criminal cases. These Standards are intended to apply in any context in which a lawyer would reasonably understand that a criminal prosecution could result.
These Standards are intended to provide guidance for the professional conduct and performance of prosecutors. They are written and intended to be entirely consistent with the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, and are not intended to modify a prosecutor's obligations under applicable rules, statutes, or the constitution. They are aspirational or describe “best practices,” and are not intended to serve as the basis for the imposition of professional discipline, to create substantive or procedural rights for accused or convicted persons, to create a standard of care for civil liability, or to serve as a predicate for a motion to suppress evidence or dismiss a charge. For purposes of consistency, these Standards sometimes include language taken from the Model Rules of Professional Conduct; but the Standards often address conduct or provide details beyond that governed by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. No inconsistency is ever intended; and in any case a lawyer should always read and comply with the rules of professional conduct and other authorities that are binding in the specific jurisdiction or matter, including choice of law principles that may regulate the lawyer’s ethical conduct.
Because the Standards for Criminal Justice are aspirational, the words “should” or “should not” are used in these Standards, rather than mandatory phrases such as “shall” or “shall not,” to describe the conduct of lawyers that is expected or recommended under these Standards. The Standards are not intended to suggest any lesser standard of conduct than may be required by applicable mandatory rules, statutes, or other binding authorities.
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ for more info
Explanation:
Answer:
Work for which someone is paid.
Explanation:
"Work for which someone is paid", specifically <u>work</u>, is quite literally the definition of labor.
However, means of production that produce a good or service could also be implying labor as well. This answer reminds me of Karl Marx and his writings, so I am assuming you are just learning about him.
<u>I would still select work for which someone is paid. </u>
Answer:
false
Explanation:
False. Independent Contractors need not to be covered.
It helped to convince loyalists to become patriots I’ll try to find the second answer
