At the time of her death she was already engaged in getting together essays for a further volume, which she proposed to publish in the autumn of or the spring Of She also intended to publish a new book of short stories, including in it some or all of Monday or Tuesday, which has been long out of print. She left behind her a considerable number of essays, sketches, and short stories, some unpublished and some previously published in newspapers; there are, indeed, enough to fill three or four volumes.
After being acknowledged by their friends as a couple for more than a decade, they decided that the time had come to get public recognition and registration of their relationship, and formally to embrace the rights and responsibilities they felt should flow from and attach to it.
Like many persons in their situation, they wanted to get married. There was one impediment. They are both women.
Their complaint has been that the law excludes them from publicly celebrating their love and Court observation paper essays to each other in marriage. Far from enabling them to regularise their union, it shuts them out, unfairly and unconstitutionally, they claim.
This, as contended for in the second case,  is where the further level of exclusion operates. The Marriage Act provides that a minister of religion who is designated as a marriage officer may follow the marriage formula usually observed by the religion concerned.
The reference to wife or husband is said to exclude same-sex couples. It was not disputed by any of the parties that neither the common law nor statute provide for any legal mechanism in terms of which Ms Fourie and Ms Bonthuys and other same-sex couples could marry.
Section 9 1 of the Constitution now reads: And if it does, what is the appropriate remedy that this Court should order? They asked for an order declaring that the law recognises their right to marry, and a mandamus ordering the Minister of Home Affairs and the Director-General to register their marriage in terms of the Marriage Act.
The applicants articulated the issue as follows: Consequently the applicants could not be married as required by the law. An omission to challenge the constitutionality of the provisions of the Marriage Act accordingly constituted an obstacle to granting the relief sought.
On this basis he dismissed the application. Roux J having in the interim retired, the application was heard by Mynhardt J, who refused to grant a positive certificate, but  did grant them leave to appeal to the SCA.
The applicants then approached the Constitutional Court for leave to appeal directly to it against the judgment and order of the High Court. Moseneke J  said that in their papers the applicants did not seek a declaration that any of the provisions of the legislation dealing with solemnising or recording of marriages was inconsistent with the Constitution, or if any was, what the appropriate relief would be in that regard.
The applicants also omitted to address all the consequences that would flow from the recognition of such a union or how it should be dissolved. The appeal was likely to raise complex and important questions of the legal conformity of our common law and statutory rules of marriage in the light of our Constitution and its resultant jurisprudence.
Moreover marriage touches on many other aspects of law, including labour law, insurance and tax. These issues are of importance not only to the applicants and the gay and lesbian community but also to society at large. The judgment emphasised that the views of the SCA on the matters that arose were of considerable importance.
The nature of the dispute raised by the appeal was, as the High Court had correctly held in issuing a negative rule 18 2 certificate, pre-eminently suited to be considered first by the SCA.
The application for leave to appeal directly to this Court was accordingly refused. Two separate judgments were delivered. All five judges held that the exclusion of same-sex couples from the common law definition of marriage constituted unfair discrimination against them. The reasons for coming to this conclusion diverged in certain significant respects, however, resulting in different approaches being taken as to the order to be made.
It also provides that when developing the common law the Court must promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights.Free Essays; Court Observation Paper; Court Observation Paper. Words Oct 21st, 6 Pages.
On Friday, April, 4, , I observed the Vanderburgh County Superior Court to observe different family law cases. The cases I heard involved contempt of court for failing to pay child support, failure to appear for a court appointed drug test. Essay on Court Observation The Central Criminal Court was established by the Central Criminal Court Act It is a component of the Crown Court (the criminal court of first instance), which hears between two and three per cent of all criminal cases, and has an appellate jurisdiction.
Free Essays; Court Observation Paper; Court Observation Paper. Words Oct 19th, 4 Pages. Observation paper Magistrate& District court Karen Rivera Cj The first court that I attend was district court, the judge was Fernando r. macias I went to the court on October 13, around When I first walked in there were a lot of people.
Type or paste a DOI name into the text box. Click Go. Your browser will take you to a Web page (URL) associated with that DOI name. Send questions or comments to doi. Court Observation. paper based on your observation of a court proceeding.
The paper must be a minimum of four pages in length. Papers that are not typewritten, double spaced and stapled will not be accepted. I will deduct for errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling.
All Court Observation Essays and Term Papers +-Popular Topics. The Death of the Moth. Moths that fly by day are not properly to be called moths; they do not excite that pleasant sense of dark autumn nights and ivy-blossom which the commonest yellow-underwing asleep in the shadow of the curtain never fails to rouse in us.