Legality Research Assignment Paper: Khela and Khosa Case (Essay Sample)

Legality
aName of Author
Name of institution
 
Khela and Khosa Case
In the Khela and Khosa cases, judicial reviews of administrative decisions were presented to analyze the controversy of the cases involving murder and criminal negligence causing death. The administrative law is established to govern forms of public law such as the constitutional law, criminal law, and family law. The main purpose of administrative law is to make sure decisions of cases are compelling, in which the state is demonstrating a duty of fairness in the practice of the government. Most vitally, administrative law concerns the relationship between the state and the individual citizen, making sure it's duties to be fair. Both Khela and Khosa cases involved controversial judgments that each has strengths and weaknesses. The judicial reviews of administrative decisions in both cases were fair, however, there are certain elements within the decisions that are debatable.
In the Khosa case, the main concern that arises in the context of administrative law is the "removal order" to India. The removal order was disputable since Mr. Khosa has challenged the Immigration Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board to continue residing in Canada.
In the Khela case, the antagonistic situation which questions whether or not habeas corpus is the appropriate solution, ties to the context of the administrative law. The controversy in the Khela case was whether or not an inmate is suitable to apply for habeas corpus, and what beneficial outcomes there will be for applying.
The final decisions of both cases focus on the role of judicial reviews of an administrative tribunal, which demonstrates the duties of fairness to the citizens. As a result, both decisions appear to be convincing in which the state is noticeably demonstrating a duty of fairness.
Strengths
An inmate can choose either to challenge the reasonableness of the decision by applying for judicial review in the Federal Court or to have the decision reviewed for reasonableness by means of an application for habeas corpus. “Reasonableness” is therefore a legitimate ground upon which to question the legality of a deprivation of liberty in an application for habeas corpus. Therefore, an inmate has the right to information hence cannot be moved without procedural actions.
The inmates were enabled to practice their democratic rights since they were not denied right to a fair trial.
Weaknesses
The inmate was linked to initiating a criminal offence within the cell and possession of hard substances heroin.
This was not considered during his application.
Despite abundant evidence that the accused was extremely unlikely to reoffend and had taken responsibility for his actions, the IAD focused on a single fact of his denial that he was “street racing” and based its refusal to grant relief largely on that fact alone. While he’s denial may well evidence some “lack of insight”, it cannot be said to contradict still less to outweigh, on a balance of probabilities all of the evidence in his favor on the issues of remorse, rehabilitation and likelihood of re-offense.
Spousal Support
The law views spousal relationships as financial partnerships. When the partnership breaks down, the person with more income or assets may have to pay support to the other. At the same time, the law expects adults to look after their own needs to the best of their abilities.
To decide on how much spousal support and the length of time that it should be paid, the law says that judges must consider a number of factors, including how much the person asking for support needs to meet his or her needs, and how much the other person can afford to pay. A person may claim support to help him or her become financially self-sufficient or to keep from ending up in serious financial difficulty.
Advisory Spousal Support Guidelines are available to help parties discuss the appropriate amount of spousal support to be paid. If the parties proceed to court, the court may consider these guidelines in determining how much spousal support should be paid, but they are not binding.
In determining whether spousal support is appropriate and reasonable, and in determining the nature, amount, and terms of payment, and duration of spousal support, which is payable either in gross or in installments, the court shall consider all of the following factors:
The income of the parties, from all sources, including, but not limited to, income derived from property divided, disbursed, or distributed. The following are included:
The relative earning abilities of the parties;
The ages and the physical, mental, and emotional conditions of the parties;
The retirement benefits of the parties;
The duration of the marriage;
The extent to which it would be inappropriate for a party, becaus...