Post by roselin10 on Dec 5, 2023 8:31:45 GMT
Are some even bigger...) the essential can be compiled in twice as few pages. Yes, there can be long decisions and yes, you are at the beginning and you don't know what information is important and what is not, but believe me, for the seminar/exam/real life NO ONE will ask you more than the ideas in that decision (who is the author of the objection/who raised the objection, what arguments the author invokes, what the Court says about the arguments that motivate the objection/objection and what are the arguments of the CCR that motivate the solution found). THAT'S IT. IDENTIFY THE DECISION STRUCTURE (aka WORK SMART NOT HARD) Just kidding...we're right...we always have to work.
Hard! Personally, I found the most difficult thing about the decisions Phone Number to be the fact that they seemed to be written without a head and without a tail. Honestly, then I had the impression that decisions should be approached like fiction... EVERY CCR decision has more or less the following structure: Title (Decision No. XXX/ XX regarding XYZ) Members of the plenary session of the Constitutional Court The authors of the objection/exception Reason for objection/exception Points of view on the objection/exception requested by the CCR to certain institutions/occupants of certain dignities/public functions (eg the Government, the President of the Chamber of Deputies, the President of the Senate, the People's Advocate, the court where the exception was raised, etc.) Finding the competence of the CCR and the legality of the referral The object of constitutionality control Substantive.
Analysis of the objection/exception (the situation is analyzed in a general way) Analysis of criticisms of unconstitutionality CCR decision (admission/rejection) Lots of dots...yes! But hey! Not all of them have to appear! As I told you earlier, at first it seemed to me that these decisions did not have a specific structure. But they, in fact, have a skeleton that does not change much, added, depending on what the CCR wants to highlight/ who drafts the decision (some decisions also have pure theory used in the argumentation, others only reference to certain elements of theory (see Decision No. / vs Decision No. / ).
Hard! Personally, I found the most difficult thing about the decisions Phone Number to be the fact that they seemed to be written without a head and without a tail. Honestly, then I had the impression that decisions should be approached like fiction... EVERY CCR decision has more or less the following structure: Title (Decision No. XXX/ XX regarding XYZ) Members of the plenary session of the Constitutional Court The authors of the objection/exception Reason for objection/exception Points of view on the objection/exception requested by the CCR to certain institutions/occupants of certain dignities/public functions (eg the Government, the President of the Chamber of Deputies, the President of the Senate, the People's Advocate, the court where the exception was raised, etc.) Finding the competence of the CCR and the legality of the referral The object of constitutionality control Substantive.
Analysis of the objection/exception (the situation is analyzed in a general way) Analysis of criticisms of unconstitutionality CCR decision (admission/rejection) Lots of dots...yes! But hey! Not all of them have to appear! As I told you earlier, at first it seemed to me that these decisions did not have a specific structure. But they, in fact, have a skeleton that does not change much, added, depending on what the CCR wants to highlight/ who drafts the decision (some decisions also have pure theory used in the argumentation, others only reference to certain elements of theory (see Decision No. / vs Decision No. / ).