I personally think this is great because it could be a source of income (non-tax source of income) now that we are facing this economic crisis and because a lot of people need it.
As the title suggests, would someone be able to give me a quick description of all the Latin terms and sections of the constitution we need to know for the legal studies exam
There is a study too expensive to acquire that says that the Global Legal Services Market Size value in 2021 is USD 882.06 billion.
Does anybody have at hand the information of the Legal Services Market Size in Latin America?
This is the study I'm referring to: https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/global-legal-services-market-size-2021-industry-share-growth-business-challenges-investment-opportunities-demand-key-manufacturers-and-2027-forecast-research-report-2021-10-04
Thanks!
AB INITIO it should be said that there is a good prima facie case for the decision of Lord Irvine, the Lord High Chancellor, to simplify the language used in court as part of the civil law reforms which bear the imprimatur of the Master of the Rolls, Lord Woolf. Lord Irvine wants lawyers, pro bono publico, to be much more straightforward in the way they speak pendente lite. Out will go, inter alia, hearings in camera or ex parte. In will come hearings in private or without notice. Plaintiffs will be replaced by claimants. Newspaper editors will no longer live in terror of writs. Instead they will tremble at claim forms. Mr Anton Piller will soon be forgotten except in cobwebbed old tomes. The eponymous legal term will be succeeded, ad infinitum and sine die, by a plain old search order.
News of the proposed changes was announced by electronic fiat on Lord Irvine's website and it is as yet unclear whether more traditional lawyers will view them as a casus belli or as an act of force majeure which defy restitutio in integrum. The lingua franca of the law may be baffling to the lay person but that, surely, was part of its charm and all of its function. Lord Hoffmann's judicial colleagues recently found that he was "a judge in his own cause," a phrase which lacks any undertones of majesty or even mystery. How much more satisfying if they had pronounced that he had offended the basic principle of nemo debet esse judex in propria? Would his noble lordship then have shrugged the matter aside so lightly? Per contra, we think. Matters that are sub judice or lis pendens have a forbidding ring to them which is sadly lacking in "pending litigation". Ultra vires is not without authority as a piece of legalistic verbiage: habeas corpus, translated into English, lacks a certain body.
All this could, in time, have a serious impact on another old legal concept, derived either from the Latin feudum, the Old English feoh, or some say, the Frankish fehu-od. They customarily arrive in the form of a "bill" (from med. Lat, bulla) and elaborately set out the price of, exempli gratia, interlocutory this, mandamus that, half a dozen subpoenas, two dozen affidavits and a fair old quantum of res ipsa loquiturs. The distilled wisdom of centuries goes into the construction of these magnificent documents. Is Lord Irvine really saying that under New Labour lawyers will be r
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hi guys, new here. I live in Peru and I want to start watching the series but I discovered that the series is not available on Netflix/prime video (Hulu doesn't exist here) so there is no legal way to watch the series on streaming...as far as I know. So, there is any legal way to watch the series outside US/EU/UK without a VPN?
For example, Jim Crow was an inherently racist law and the war on drugs was racist through practice. I think they're both 2 word phrases that begin with "in" or "en," but I can't for the life of me remember what they are. If anyone has any pointers as to where I can get an answer, that'd be appreciated as well.
[deleted]
I read the news and apparently in Latin America, the leaders of Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil and Panama have come out to support El Salvador's president in making bitcoin legal tender. Argentina's inflation rate is 43% and some of the politicians there see bitcoin as a remedy to protect their citizens' assets.
But for some reason after these media reports coming from Latin America, the North American /Western European press has been largely negative, ramping up tag lines like "bitcoin is a scam" "money laundering," "criminal activities," and "crackdown." I can guarantee you that when you run through an article at least 3 out of 4 of those key phrases will be there. As of now, there is zero vocal support for bitcoin in the US Congress and UK regulators want more data on transactions.
I am not at all criticizing or judging the way things are done in Latin America; please don’t take it that way. I just want to see from a different perspective. I work as a paralegal and often, legal documents from Latin America are unnecessarily wordy. The documents also tend to have misspellings, grammatical errors, EXTREME run-on sentences that turn into paragraphs, and random capitalization. It makes me think that maybe whoever drafted certain documents may not be legit, but I may be wrong.
Why does it work this way? Is there a reason?
I speak Spanish but since I see most posts here in English, I decided that’s how to post. Thanks and have a great day.
Edit: I am Cuban-American; I live in the States. I’ll be the first to admit Cuban legal documents are horrendous.
