Judicial economy most commonly refers to the refusal of a court to decide one or more claims raised in a case, on the grounds that it has decided other claims in the case and that its decision on those claims should satisfy the parties. For example, the plaintiff may claim that the defendants actions violated three distinct laws. Having found for the plaintiff for a violation of the first law, the court then has the discretion to exercise judicial economy and refuse to make a decision on the remaining two claims, on the grounds that the finding of one violation should be sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff.
It also refers to the overall efficiency in the operation of the judicial system or the efficiency of a given court. For instance, in the presence of a threshold issue that will ultimately decide a case, a court may elect to hear that issue rather than proceeding with a full-blown trial. Class action lawsuits are another example of judicial economy in action, as they are often tried as a single case, yet involve many cases with similar facts. Rather than trying each case individually, which would unduly burden the judicial system, the cases can be consolidated into a class action.
This article, image, template or category should belong in one or more categories, in addition to being in a stub category. Please categorize it so it may be associated with related articles, images, templates or categories. Thank you. Please remove this template after categorizing. This article has been tagged since November 2006.
Legal consequences of Rule 94(B): the procedural legal impact of taking judicial notice of an adjudicated fact is not that the fact cannot be challenged or refuted at trial, but rather that the burden of proof to disqualify the fact is shifted to the disputing party.
The Trial Chamber stated that Rule 94 is for the purpose of achieving judicialeconomy in the sense that it condenses the relevant proceedings to what is essential for the case of each party without rehearing supplementary allegations already proven in past proceedings and thereby shortens the duration of the trial.
In other words, the Trial Chamber held that the procedural legal impact of taking judicial notice of an adjudicated fact is not that the fact cannot be challenged or refuted at trial, but rather that the burden of proof to disqualify the fact is shifted to the disputing party.
Judicialeconomy most commonly refers to the refusal of a court to decide one or more claims raised in a case, on the grounds that it has decided other claims in the case and that its decision on those claims should satisfy the parties.
Having found for the plaintiff for a violation of the first law, the court then has the discretion to exercise judicialeconomy and refuse to make a decision on the remaining two claims, on the grounds that the finding of one violation should be sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff.
Class action lawsuits are another example of judicialeconomy in action, as they are often tried as a single case, yet involve many cases with similar facts.
Feeds |
Contact