Auroran law: Difference between revisions
→Convention
No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 38:
However the ACJ can give an opinion on matters outside of the case called a ''ratio decidendi''. The ''ratio decidendi'' is the part of the judgement that is not binding. It can have persuasive effect, but cannot take the place of case law or be treated as case law. The minority judgements of the ACJ are not binding and they are treated as a type of ''ratio decidendi''.
==Convention==
Convention refers to longstanding practices and traditions that have legal implications. Convention is a ''sui generis'' concept in that it is not law ''per se'' but can be used as a valid defence.
In a case before the ACJ, it can be argued that there was a reasonable expectation or implied understanding due to the existence of convention. For instance in a country like [[Great Morstaybishlia]] certain conventions are not formally written but have the force of law such as that the [[Succession to the Morstaybishlian Throne|King]] must abide by the advise of his Ministers in the exercise of Royal Prerogatives vested in the Crown. Thus, conventions can be as important as written law. In some cases written law assumes that conventions exist. In the same way, convention can be useful as an argument in cases before the ACJ.
Because the UNAC is much younger than its member states, it does not have many conventions, however there are unwritten conventions among member states such as allowing the merchant ships of foreign nations to moor at their ports of they are in distress. There is no formal process by which convention arises and there is no formal process by which it is amended or terminated except through the passage of time.
Thus, the ACJ must apply the following tests to determine that an enforceable or valid convention exists:
* The reasonableness test requires that the convention's expectations are reasonable, i.e. they are valid, fair and practicable.
* The endurance test requires that the convention has survived for a long time. This can vary by circumstance.
* The consistency test requires that the convention is applied consistently under similar circumstances with little deviation.
* The conformity test requires that the convention must not contradict domestic or Auroran laws.
Conventions can be rendered irrelevant by the passage of time; the circumstances under which they existed are impractical. For instance if there is a convention that sailors show their astrolabe at the aft of a vessel, this convention is no longer relevant given that modern ships do not use astrolabes. Convention can be rendered irrelevant or formalised by the passage of new laws.
| |||