3-1 The Types of Jurisdiction and their Importance
Jurisdiction
refers to the authority of the courts to listen to cases then make a binding
decision for the concerned parties. Before getting the approval to hear cases,
however, a court must have many jurisdiction types.
- The first one is original jurisdiction
Kumar (2019a) stated that
this jurisdiction grants courts the power to conduct trials and identify facts
within cases. The courts, thus, get to hear and discover a conflict in the
initial instance of a case.
- Next is appellate jurisdiction
Kumar (2019b) argued that appellate
jurisdiction enables courts to review the conclusions made by lower courts, to
determine if they applied the law appropriately. It, therefore, involves
removal of cases from the tribunal court to superior ones to evaluate the
appropriateness of proceedings and decisions that the inferior courts made.
- Personam jurisdiction
Kubasek (2016)
explained that this jurisdiction offers the power to present decisions that
affect a particular person before court. A person gives the court personam
jurisdiction over him/her when after signing a lawsuit. In other words, filing
a case implies that the person (or plaintiff) asks the court to come up with a
ruling that will affect his/her rights. For successful ruling of a case, however,
the court must also gain jurisdiction over the party sued by plaintiff. The
court must, thus, send a complaint file to the defendant to acquire this power
over him or her. If a plaintiff is unable to locate a defendant, who happens to
own property in the given state, the action is directly brought against that
property. Kubasek (2016) referred to this as In Rem jurisdiction.
- Subject matter jurisdiction
In
emphasising the importance of subject matter jurisdiction, Kubasek (2016)
explained that a judge cannot decide on cases over which the particular court
lacks this jurisdiction. Even if a judge makes a decision, anyway, it will be
void and without meaning. Moreover, no parties can grant a court this
jurisdiction. Only the law can do it. The court systems with subject matter
jurisdiction are exclusive federal, concurrent federal and, state jurisdiction.
Exclusive Federal jurisdiction only applies to those
cases over which state court cannot render decisions. Examples are bankruptcy
cases, federal criminal prosecutions, and admiralty cases. On the other hand, concurrent federal
jurisdiction is relevant to cases that a federal or state court can hear. Given
that exclusive jurisdiction hears very few cases, a state court system hears
almost every case within its jurisdiction.
3-5 Definition and Rationale for the Existence of Attorney–client Privilege
The principle of this privilege is that a client should receive accurate
legal guidance from an attorney. Forte (2003) argued that attorney-client privilege is
founded on the concept of honour as it is intended to prevent the attorney
from testifying against the client. Therefore, any person that pursues the
assistance of a lawyer ought not to worry about the disclosure of their
secrets. This means that the client is allowed to openly and truthfully
communicate with the lawyer, disclosing all the useful details because the
privilege establishes a zone of privacy (Forte, 2003). The principle also
shares a close association with attorney work product (Kubasek, 2016). An
attorney’s overall role is to produce documents or records that should be kept
confidential.
- Rationale
The
attorney-client privilege exists because it benefits both the plaintiff and the
lawyer who is handling the case. One benefit of attorney-client privilege is
that it enables the attorney to understand the client and his or her case better.
Kubasek (2016) stated that the effectiveness of an attorney’s representation
depends on how deeply he or she understands the facts surrounding a case. As it is, the primary reason for establishing
the privilege was to enable a client access sound and competent directive in
exchange for complete disclosure to the lawyer.
Again,
it minimises chances of encountering irreparable harm. One feature of the
attorney-client privilege is that it promotes client honesty. This means the
client will not withhold any details that are important to the case, knowing
that the attorney is not allowed to use or reveal it without first seeking the
client’s permission. This way, the attorney identifies all the vital points to
raise of address when representing the client.
The other good thing about this privilege is that it may be exempted to prevent a client from committing a crime. For instance, Kubasek (2016) explained that disclosing information about a client’s intent to commit a crime is not an attorney’s requirement but is simply authorised. Even more, the privilege excludes communication with attorney that not for requesting legal guidance. Such communications are not confidential.