-
Par des avocats au Conseil
Principe d'exhaustivité -
Public nature of statutes and court decisions ; no copyright
-
Law Reports published by the Special Committee on the Law Reporting System
Selective publishing -
Excerpts from the Minnesota SC decisions
-
Comprehensive coverage of judicial opinions from all states
-
-
Consideration but rejection of a no-citation rule
-
Principe de sélection des décisions
-
Only limitation on the use of unreported cases are cases where no reason for decisions are written, or insufficient reasons, that do not allow understanding
-
"The authority of a case depends not upon whether it is to be found in a series of reports but upon the fact that it is a judicial decision"
-
-
"The judges of the Courts of Appeals and District Courts authorize the publication of only those opinions which are of general precedential value"
-
-
"While treating former decisions of the House as normally binding, the House proposed to depart from a previous decision when it appears right to do so."
-
-
-
-
Par le Pr. Catala à l'IRETIJ
Base d'abstracts -
"Too many opinions are being printed or published or otherwise disseminated"
-
Recommends that the Judicial Conference direct each circuit to review its publication policy so that :
- Opinions will not be published unless ordered by a majority of the panel rendering the decision ;
- Non-published opinions will not cited ;
- When an opinion is not published, the public record shall be completed by publishing the judgment of the Court -
Approves the Recommendations of the Board
-
Publication
- If established a new rule ;
- If involves a legal issue of continuing legal interest ;
- If criticizes existing law ;
- If resolves an apparent conflict in the law -
-
Federal case-law reaches back 51 years for SC ; 31 for Courts of Appeals ; 16 for District Court
-
Public mandate to publish decisions from Quebec's courts
-
Same standards as 1973
-
-
Lack of coordination between the reports
-
Disposition by summary order - have, no use (1/7/9/) ; have, use (2/3/5/8/10/Columbia)
Special test for publication - 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/Columbia
Same as standards - 10
No-citation - 1/6/7/8/9/Columbia
No no-citation - 10 (copies)/5/4 (usual circumstance + copies)/3/2 -
-
-
See R. MUNDAY, "Case law and the computer"
-
"The times has come when your Lordships should adopt the practice of declining to allow transcripts of unreported judgments of the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal to be cited on hearing unless leave is given to do so (...). Such leave should only be granted (...) statement of some principles of law, relevant to an issue in the appeal to this House, that is binding on the Court of Appeal and of which the substance (...) is not to be found in one of the (...) reports." (566-8)
-
Initiative privée sous contrôle d'une commission
Décisions du CC/CE/CCass/CCptes -
-
System of marking with stickers
- High priority ; red ; warrant definite consideration for inclusion in the NZLR
- Medium priority ; blue ; warrant definite consideration for inclusion in one of the available specialised series of law reports
- Low priority ; green ; some interest for brief reporting but probably do not warrant reporting in a series of law report
- Not recommanded ; yellow ; decide nothing of interest other than to the parties themselves -
No copyright protection on pagination system/text of written court decisions
-
Requires counsel to provide the court with a full copy of any unreported judgment to which counsels refer
-
Publication of decisions by SCOTUS to not commercial (= free access) and commercial entities
-
-
-
Free public access to selected primary legal information (project HERMES)
Still a source in 2012 -
No-citation - 9 (not published, not precedent) ; Columbia (possible if biding or preclusive effect when relevant)
Citation disfavored - 4 (except for res judicate/estoppel/law of the case/precedential value to the case/no published/copies)
Limitation of citation - 5 (res judicata/estoppel/law of the case)/8 (same)/10 (same)/ 11 (not published, not precedent, persuasive authority)
Silent - 2/3 -
Comprehensive publication of all decisions
-
"Leave to cite unreported cases will not usually be granted
unless counsel are able to assure the court that the transcript in
question contains a relevant statement of legal principle not
found in reported authority and that the authority is not cited
because of the phraseology used or as an illustration of the
application of an established legal principle." -
-
Abrogation du décret de 1984
Ouverture à des décisions des cours et tribunaux judiciaires -
Cases must be cited as they appear in the official Law Reports
Extension of Practice Statement 1996 to High Court and Crown Court -
Reiteration of Practice Statement 1996
-
First step in the creation of CanLII
-
-
-
Challenge of 8th circuit rule that unpublished opinions are not precedent and should not be cited ; rules as unconstitutionnal
-
5 provinces publish their judicial decisions online/free of charge - BC ; Alberta ; Ontario ; Quebec ; Prince-Edward-Island)
The rest relies on traditional, commercial publishing - Saskatchewan ; Manitoba ; Newfoundland ; New Brunswick ; Northwest Territories ; Nunavut
9/24 superior tribunals publish their decision online -
Laddie J. "Now there is no preselection... A poor decision of, say, a court of first instance used to be burried by omission from the reports. Now it may be dug to support a cause of action or defence, which, without its encouragement, might have been allowed to die a quiet death"
-
No-citation rule of the 9th circuit upheld
-
-
Website ; federal appellate/district/bankruptcy courts
Not free -
Art. 9 - "Des documents sur des supports différents ont la même valeur s'ils comportent la même information, si l'intégrité de chacun d'eux est assuré et s'ils respectent tous deux les règles de droit qui les régissent"
-
-
Certain decisions (one party only/permission to appeal/only decide if arguable/County Court cases unless to illustrate conventional measure of damages in personal injury case OR demonstrate current authority if no higher decision) "may not in future be cited before any court unless it clearly indicates that it purports to establish a new principle or to extend the present law. (...) That indication must take the form of an express statement to that effect."
-
Aims at increasing electronic dissemination
-
-
Diffusion des décisions du CC/CE/CCass/TC
Sélection pour la CCptes et toutes les autres juridictions selon des "modalités propres à chaque ordre" -
- 1,500/week
-
-
Création d'un service de la documentation et des études à la CCass chargé d'établir une base de données des décisions et avis de la CCass ainsi que de décisions des autres juridictions présentant un intérêt particulier
-
No-citation - 4 circuits
Discouraged but allows - 6
Freely allows it - 3 -
Notification of the use of an unreported decision to opposing counsel and supply of copies
Revoke no-citation rule formely imposed -
-
"A court may not not prohibit or restrict the citation of judicial opinions, orders, judgments (...) that have been designated as "unpublished"."
-
Publicly available
All Courts of Appeals since 1950 ; Supreme Court since 1754 -
-
Advocated firm measures against citation of unreported decisions to prevent an "impeding crisis" (§ 74)
-
-
-
Cases must be cited as reported in the Official Law Reports OR as in the W.L.R/All ER OR specialist report
"An unreported case should not usually be cited unless it contains a relevant statement of legal principle not found in reported authority" -
Courts of appeal from 20 years ; superior courts for 10 to 20 years ; varies for the rest
-
While all decisions of this court are binding, care must be taken to avoid reading unwarranted jurisprudential principles into a brief endorsement ; no exclusion/no-citation rule
-
Secondary sources (journal)
-
Every decision is of the same precedential value
-
Sanction for no respect of obligation to cite as reported ; for citation of unreported case for propositions that could be found in reported cases
Risk of authorities being disallowed -
Federal - From 1877 (SC) ; 90s for courts ; 2000s for Commissions ; 90/2010s for tribunals
BC - 90/2017 (CRT)
Alberta - 70/2019
Saskatchewan - 70/2019
Manitoba - 99/2015
Ontario - 83/2019
Quebec - 78/2018
New Brunswick - 90/2008
Nova Scotia - 90/2013
PEI - 93/2005
TN - 85/2019
Yukon - 96/2017
Newfoundlands - 89/2009
Nunavut - 99/2001