The Constitution. And shit.

[oneofsix]

funny enough. Thats CASE law.
Common law is 'the imemorable practice of the people'
by LEGISLATION common=universal (universal=everyone, like, not a democratic majority, but EVERYONE)
anyway, case law is ruled under legislation.
If your person is charged with an infringement, and theres proof, your person is guilty.
Steal a loaf of bread to feed the family, ie.
They cant rule against legislation.

Luckily I got the main point I was going for in that not under rule of TPTB but got the rest totally fucked up.
BTW they often rule against parliament if not against legislation. Courts rule differently on legislation than politicians intended.

[BMWST?]

funny enough. Thats CASE law.
Common law is 'the imemorable practice of the people'
by LEGISLATION common=universal (universal=everyone, like, not a democratic majority, but EVERYONE)
anyway, case law is ruled under legislation.
If your person is charged with an infringement, and theres proof, your person is guilty.
Steal a loaf of bread to feed the family, ie.
They cant rule against legislation.

case law is the testing of law,its not a specific seperate branch of law...ie there might be a case where you were accused of dangerous driving because you were lane splitting...in this case a judge found that akzle did not break the law,so from now on us bikers quote akzle vs the police for our case law re lane splitting.The government cant overturn that,they have to try to create new laws if they want to stop bikers splitting.But in the meantime we are safe cos of that specific case.

[oneofsix]

case law is the testing of law,its not a specific seperate branch of law...ie there might be a case where you were accused of dangerous driving because you were lane splitting...in this case a judge found that akzle did not break the law,so from now on us bikers quote akzle vs the police for our case law re lane splitting.The government cant overturn that,they have to try to create new laws if they want to stop bikers splitting.But in the meantime we are safe cos of that specific case.

I see a cross over between case and common law.

[Akzle]

...because that would be unconstitutional.....

no, illegal.

Luckily I got the main point I was going for in that not under rule of TPTB but got the rest totally fucked up.
BTW they often rule against parliament if not against legislation. Courts rule differently on legislation than politicians intended.

the letter of the law

case law is the testing of law,its not a specific seperate branch of law...ie there might be a case where you were accused of dangerous driving because you were lane splitting...in this case a judge found that akzle did not break the law,so from now on us bikers quote akzle vs the police for our case law re lane splitting.The government cant overturn that,they have to try to create new laws if they want to stop bikers splitting.But in the meantime we are safe cos of that specific case.

no, it would be found that akzles lane splitting did not constitute dangerous driving.
While the next case, bmwsts lane splitting on the rear wheel while flipping the bird, is dangerous.
Precedent is the word. But we're off topic.

[Akzle]

I see a cross over between case and common law.

in modern white parlance theyre interchangable.

Common law SHOULDNT have its precedent under legislation.
Smoking dope, ie.
By COMMON law, is lawful. Under crown, is illegal.

[Winston001]

As I understand it it is law made up from court cases rather than that dictated from Parliament but it is only useful as long as judges and courts are separate from government. It also incorporates historical elements because it is developed over time so not as troubled by the here and now. A constitution can be amended with relative ease compared to history.

That's a pretty good explanation.

Our laws are derived from two stems: Acts of Parliament and Common Law.

The Westminster Parliament has existed for 600 years and passed countless Acts = laws. Those Acts up til 1840 are adopted in NZ but we have our own Acts since then. For example The Statute of Elizabeth 1601 encodes the law of charities. Magna Carta 1215 is where we get the right of habeas corpus.


The Common Law is older, deeper, and richer because it grows from decisions of the Courts over a similar period, decisions settling the infinite variety of arguments people get into. These decisions provide precedents so future arguments can be resolved knowing the law is settled in such and such a direction. Every now and then the Common Law branches out in a new way - the categories are never closed.

Basically Parliament looks after the big policy stuff - general rules, and the Courts look after the common everyday civil (not criminal) legal disputes.

[BMWST?]

That's a pretty good explanation.

Our laws are derived from two stems: Acts of Parliament and Common Law.

The Westminster Parliament has existed for 600 years and passed countless Acts = laws. Those Acts up til 1840 are adopted in NZ but we have our own Acts since then. For example The Statute of Elizabeth 1601 encodes the law of charities. Magna Carta 1215 is where we get the right of habeas corpus.


The Common Law is older, deeper, and richer because it grows from decisions of the Courts over a similar period, decisions settling the infinite variety of arguments people get into. These decisions provide precedents so future arguments can be resolved knowing the law is settled in such and such a direction. Every now and then the Common Law branches out in a new way - the categories are never closed.

Basically Parliament looks after the big policy stuff - general rules, and the Courts look after the common everyday civil (not criminal) legal disputes.

and case law sets the precedents

[Akzle]

That's a pretty good explanation.

Our laws are derived from two stems: Acts of Parliament and Common Law.

The Westminster Parliament has existed for 600 years and passed countless Acts = laws. Those Acts up til 1840 are adopted in NZ but we have our own Acts since then. For example The Statute of Elizabeth 1601 encodes the law of charities. Magna Carta 1215 is where we get the right of habeas corpus.


The Common Law is older, deeper, and richer because it grows from decisions of the Courts over a similar period, decisions settling the infinite variety of arguments people get into. These decisions provide precedents so future arguments can be resolved knowing the law is settled in such and such a direction. Every now and then the Common Law branches out in a new way - the categories are never closed.

Basically Parliament looks after the big policy stuff - general rules, and the Courts look after the common everyday civil (not criminal) legal disputes.

ACTs are legislation. Statute.
Regulatory law if you really feel the need to use the word law.

[Berries]

i hear it a lot and it irks me.
Concerning nz. 'its uncostitutional', 'constitutional review' etc.

What the fuck do people believe to be the nz constitution?!

Farrrk. You seem to be starting random threads these days like a couple of the women who frequent the forum. Has someone stolen your horse or something and you can't get out?

[Akzle]

Farrrk. You seem to be starting random threads these days like a couple of the women who frequent the forum. Has someone stolen your horse or something and you can't get out?

no. My horses cam chain snapped. No cunt will pay me to leave. The mods seem to have given up on me. Ed seems to be on holiday.

...and i was genuinely interested in what happens in sheeples brains when they hear 'constitution'

[Banditbandit]

Have you seen the resultant shit from those pies

Yeah .. used to float off Moa Point ...

OR
The govt wasnt constitutionally formed so that legislation is unlawful.

Yes ... that's right ... The Treaty says the country belongs to us - not you white fellows .. and we hold sovereignty ..

I was more wondering what the average joe THOUGHT not googld. It seems to be a catchphrase accepted/taken in ignorance.

Jeez .. you don't ask for much do you ... the average joe is taught NOT to think ..

[Banditbandit]

Our laws are derived from two stems: Acts of Parliament and Common Law.

The Westminster Parliament has existed for 600 years and passed countless Acts = laws.

Our laws have existed here for 2,000 years ... and we are still here ... and we still follow them (and sometimes we follow your laws too.)

[Akzle]

Yes ... that's right ... The Treaty says the country belongs to us - not you white fellows .. and we hold sovereignty ..

haha. Treaty. So you need the queen to aknowledge your 'right' (as a 'native') to sovereignty...?

And who you calling a white fallow?

Some fuckn evidence. You havnt done a very good job of defending the cuntry from crackerism.

[Hitcher]

I was wondering how long it would be until the T word was mentioned.

[Big Dave]