For abbreviations of legal journal titles, see also the list of legal journals indexed by the Encyclopedia of Law (which may contain several articles related to pension repatriation decisions) (choose the letter with which the title of the legal journal begins). See Index of legal abbreviations used in Australia Translation: Your private diaries may contain evidence in the case, and opposing parties have the legal right to copy and review it when submitting a request for submission of documents. Today`s #LEGAL term is: #Discovery Have you heard this term on a TV show? t.co/oklfYHj5th . #lawyer#TheMoreYouKnowpic.twitter.com/9S5RpcHrca The definition of « discovery » in law is the exchange of legal information and facts known to a case. Think of discovery as obtaining and disclosing the evidence and position of each party to a case so that all parties involved can decide what their best options are – going to court or negotiating an early resolution. RESPONSE: When a complaint is submitted to a defendant in litigation, the « response » is the written response that relates to each allegation and admits or denies the errors. Parties to a case must participate in the investigation process, which means that they must hand over information and evidence about a claim so that all parties involved can know what awaits them in the trial. WRITTEN DISCOVERY Under the umbrella of « written discovery, » we find, « We are in discovery right now, I hope we get what we need with this statement. » RPBA – CPPR – CPSR – CVPP – RPCX – RPDA – DPRD – RPDE – LDPR – PDP Translation: The investigative process is ongoing and we try to get all the evidence we need when we sit in person and question the defendant under oath. For these reasons, it is very rare during a trial for a lawyer to present surprising evidence, as many television characters seem to do with regularity. There is no answer to this question like « MISCELLANEOUS, SPORTS, GOVERNMENT » all categories for anything that does not fit into another category. It can represent anything from « leftover » items to hard-to-classify items.

Testing can be time-consuming, wasteful of energy and money. Discovery encourages the parties to choose a settlement and end the dispute before trial or before the end of the process. Like showing your cards to your opponent in a poker game, discovery reveals the strengths and weaknesses of each game`s hands. Now that they know the evidence, either party can continue the process or fold their hands depending on what has been revealed. DISCOVERABLE: This is potential evidence – notes, diaries, photos, videos, etc. – these « findable » elements must be made available to the opposing parties in the dispute. « They have to pass this log during the discovery if they emit RPD. » A testimony is an opportunity for a lawyer to ask for whatever is necessary to gather, clarify and « discover » evidence and facts. Knowing the facts, the parties can then decide what to do with the claim.

A priori is often contrasted with the expression a posteriori, which is a fact derived from observations or experiments. I learned in a philosophy course that the opposite of « a priori » knowledge is « a posteriori » knowledge. If I had to pronounce the word « chair, » most people would have an a priori knowledge of what an ideal chair looks like. It has four legs, a seat and a backrest. However, if I wanted a carpenter to build me a chair, he would use postori knowledge to design it. He would have the experience of seeing many chairs and knowing how to duplicate one. n. a priori is a Latin expression meaning « of the old ». The a priori hypothesis refers to propositional knowledge; something that comes before without experience; something we believe to be true. The opposite is a retrospective hypothesis. Immanuel Kant explained in his Critique of Pure Reason (1781; 1787) that mathematical knowledge was considered a priori fundamental knowledge. The acceptance that forensic science works in a certain way without experimenting to prove it could be an example of a priori acceptance by jurors and sometimes the courts.

The accused may be free to challenge this and offer expert witnesses in order to discredit witness statements that are scientifically accepted and therefore flawless. They can provide their own experts to prove that « expert testimony » is not evidence of a derived scenario or that the assumption of the perfect conclusions of science is wrong. If a prosecutor compiles all the evidence for a trial, there could be some a priori evidence accompanying it. Some facts are automatically admitted by deductive hypothesis and others must be proved. Lawyers must evaluate all the evidence and find the necessary evidence for evidence that is not based on deductive arguments and easily accepted from the facts that precede it. Not all evidence is a priori; Some things are much more obvious. A witness to a murder does not present a priori evidence, but confirms the details that a crime took place. The witness does not deduce the murder if he saw it with his own eyes.

He might conclude that he is witnessing a murder rather than an accident, and much about what the witness saw could make it a logical derivation. One day, Naomi was involved in an accident on the way to work, and since she was taken to the hospital by ambulance, no one called her employer. Naomi`s supervisor assumed a priori that Naomi was very late again and fired her. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a priori is defined as follows: In law, an a priori is a type of legal reasoning put forward when a set of facts or ideas are taken for granted. An a priori argument is a type of argument that you can create based on the knowledge you already have. Latin term meaning « cause and effect ». A priori is a logical term used to designate that if a generally accepted truth is shown as the cause, another particular effect must necessarily follow. This term refers to a type of reasoning that examines given general principles to know what particular facts or observations of real life can be derived from them. Another name for this method is deductive thinking. (ah-pree-ory) n.

of Latin, a hypothesis that is true without further proof or must prove it. It is believed that the sun will rise tomorrow. However, it has a negative side: an a priori hypothesis made unquestionably on the basis that no analysis or study is necessary may be mental laziness when reality is not so certain. The Latin term a priori refers to knowledge that comes from theoretical thought rather than actual observation or personal experience. In the most basic use of the term, a person might assume that if Bobby went to kindergarten for at least six days, he went to kindergarten for more than five days. In its practical application, however, describes a priori the knowledge that exists without reference to any evidence or real reality. To explore this concept, consider the following a priori definition. Knowledge a priori and a posteriori can be very important when it comes to a criminal trial. We know a priori that killing a person is a crime. There is also retrospective knowledge that bringing a loaded weapon to a confrontation could result in death. This is very similar to direct and circumstantial evidence. Alternatively, a crime requires a priori the commission of the act (actus reus) and the criminal intent (mens rea).

A priori knowledge is knowledge that comes from the past. There are certain types of evidence that can be admitted without having to prove its validity. For example, a witness may have encountered a corpse. There are a priori assumptions that immediately accompany the fact that the person who was killed is dead. This may not require much additional evidence. What is the definition of a priori in the English dictionary? With mathematical knowledge, there are many things that can be explained a priori. However, the use of the modern language has deviated considerably from Latin. An a priori conclusion or judgment is one that is necessarily true, that cannot be proven or refuted by experience, and that is known to be true by a process of reasoning independent of any factual evidence. The term is commonly used to refer to a judgment that is generally considered safe or that is likely to be introduced without analysis or investigation. Accusing someone of accepting a fact or conclusion a priori often means denigrating them for not supporting a judgment with evidence or analysis.

The term « a priori » is used to present arguments based on the reason or knowledge you already have. In Naomi`s example, her employer made an assumption based on his own previous behavior, although he had no personal knowledge of the situation that actually caused him to take time off work that day. Other a priori assumptions are based on fundamental truths that man usually represents. The term a priori is not always used positively in law and can be an accusation against opposing lawyers. Instead of being logically inferred, this could mean that it is not supported by other evidence. If a lawyer argues that someone else`s evidence is only inferred, he or she may argue that the opponents did not present enough evidence to support a derivation and that such assumptions should be inadmissible.

The Ministry of the Interior is the main instrument for State control and supervision of the criminal justice system. The Ministry of Interior police monitor Laotians and foreigners living in Laos; There is a system of informants in working committees and residential areas. According to the 1993 national reports of the United States Department of State on human rights practices, the Party and the State monitor various aspects of family and social life through neighborhood committees and workplaces. These committees are responsible for maintaining law and order and reporting « bad elements » to the police, as well as providing policy training and disciplining staff. [2] The Lao People`s Democratic Republic was established on 2 July. The legal system of the Lao People`s Democratic Republic was established in December 1975, and has gradually developed through the combination of the basic civil law system, the importance of the socialist legal system and the tradition of the ethnic groups of the Lao people. However, some important judgments set precedent on the instructions of the Chief Justice. In 1986, the State adopted and promulgated the policy of the new economic mechanism, which is an important step in the transformation and opening of the country to the world. As a result, it is not only foreign direct investment, but also networking with other sectors that has increased year after year. In order to ensure the legal administration of the State and society by the Government, the first Constitution was adopted by the Supreme People`s Assembly[1] and promulgated by the President of the Republic on 15 August 1991.[2] However, as an intention and inspiration of the Government, the Lao People`s Democratic Republic has been declared a State governed by the rule of law.

Laos inherited its civil legal system from the French colonial administrators. The original Civil Code also contained Lao customary law. [1] The ASEAN Charter entered into force on 15 December 2008. This is the basis for the realization of the ASEAN Community by providing the legal status and institutional framework of ASEAN. It also codifies ASEAN norms, rules and values, sets clear objectives for ASEAN; and represents accountability and compliance. For detailed comments on the Charter, see the following book: Case law is not recognized as a source of law and is not part of the legal system. This guide will help you explore the legal systems of the 10 Southeast Asian countries that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) – Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar (Burma), Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Information on ASEAN and human rights can be found on the Southeast Asia page of our Human Rights Research Guide. Japan and Korea have also been added to this research guide. In 1989, Laos took steps to reduce the number of political prisoners, many of whom have been detained since 1975. Several hundred detainees, including many senior officials and officers of the former US-backed RLG and the Royal Lao Army, have been released from re-education centres in the northeastern province of Houaphan. Released detainees said hundreds of people remained in eight camps, including at least six generals and former high-ranking members of the RLG.

They reportedly performed manual work such as cutting wood, repairing roads and building irrigation systems. In 1993, Amnesty International reported human rights violations committed in the continued detention of three « political prisoners » imprisoned since 1975 but not convicted until 1992, as well as those who were subject to restrictions or, according to international standards, unfair trials. [3] Tuchakorn Kitcharoen is a Senior Partner at ZICOlaw in the Lao People`s Democratic Republic. He holds a Master`s degree in Competition, Innovation and Commercial Law from the London School of Economics and Political Science in London, UK. He also holds a Master`s degree in Commercial Law from the University of Bristol in Bristol, United Kingdom. Tuchakorn received his Bachelor of Laws from Thammasat University Law School in Thailand. Tuchakorn has been called to the bar in Thailand since 2012 and was admitted to the bar in 2013. He practices in Thailand and Laos for domestic and international clients both as a litigator and as legal counsel. His practice focuses on foreign direct investment, bank and project finance, and corporate and commercial law. He worked as a legal advisor for Pepsi-Cola (Thai) Trading before joining ZICOlaw in the Lao People`s Democratic Republic in 2018.

The criminal justice system is deficient in terms of precedent and representation. Hearings are not held in public, although court decisions are announced publicly.

Cigarettes can be purchased at tobacconists, convenience stores and vending machines, although their purchase in vending machines is only possible with a so-called TASPO card, a photo ID that verifies the age of the holder. The current prevalence of smoking in the general population of Japan is declining. Smoking prevalence was 32% in 2000 and fell to 21% in 2015, with a further decline to about 16% in 2025. Among males, prevalence increased from 51% in 2000 to 33% in 2015, before decreasing to 24% in 2025. For women, the lower prevalence fell from 13% in 2000 to 10% in 2015 and is expected to decline further to about 8% by 2025. In its 2nd edition 2018 report, WHO published estimates of the trend in smoking prevalence, showing a slight deviation in smoking prevalence from WHO country profiles. Data for estimates are from WHO databases. Trend lines are projections, not predictions of future success. A projection indicates a likely outcome if the country maintains its tobacco control efforts at the same level at which it has implemented them to date. Therefore, the impact of recent interventions may change the expected endpoint presented in the projection. Although the estimation methods used in the first and second editions of the WHO report are the same, the volume of data available for the second edition is larger, i.e. 200 additional national surveys.

The results presented are therefore more robust. Until 1985, the tobacco industry was a state monopoly; The Japanese government is still involved in the industry through the Ministry of Finance, which owns only a third of Japan Tobacco`s current inventory after a sell-off in March 2013, and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, which is active in public health and other tobacco control policies. [6] Smoking is practiced by about 20,000,000 people in Japan, and the country is one of the largest tobacco markets in the world,[1] although tobacco consumption has declined in recent years. [2] The country`s legal measures were reviewed by our legal staff in consultation with lawyers or tobacco control experts. It is quite obvious that the convoluted state of tobacco regulation in Japan is directly related to the fact that the government as a whole and its individual members who own a steak in JT have a vested interest not only in the survival, but also in the prosperity of the tobacco industry. This asset proved strangely beneficial, as the government sold large portions of JT`s shares on more than one occasion to fund national reconstruction efforts such as the reconstruction in northeastern Japan after the Tohoku earthquake and the Fukushima nuclear disaster, a move that was both encouraging and confusing. Currently, the Ministry of Finance owns just over 33% of JT. The tobacco lobby`s clever argument was that smokers are not allowed to go out to smoke a cigarette because regulations enacted in the early 2000s prohibited smoking in outdoor public places. This meant that smokers had no choice but to smoke indoors in designated smoking areas. In Japan, ultra-nicotine cigarette brands with ventilation holes on cigarette filters have been widely marketed to smokers.

The use of these brands of cigarettes leads to compensatory smoking. Brands of menthol cigarettes that have a refreshing and anesthetic effect are also sold. In 2013, smokeless tobacco products similar to Swedish snus, the sale of which is banned in the European Union with the exception of Sweden, were placed on the Japanese market. These tobacco products have « toxicity », have a « ventilation filter », are « attractive » and promote « addiction ». Tobacco smoke and smokeless tobacco are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in « Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans ». Articles 9 and 10 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) regulate the content of tobacco products and the disclosure of tobacco products. The implementation of some other articles has progressed gradually in Japan. However, Articles 9 and 10 are out of time. Japanese governmental authorities are urged to implement articles 9 and 10 without delay. Tobacco has been around in Japan since the 16th century, no one really knows how it got here, but needless to say, it has grown. In 1898, the government introduced a tax on leaves and the sale of tobacco became a nationalized monopoly. During the rationing periods of World War II, the government allowed 3 cigarettes per man per day, and this rationing continued until 1950.

The abolition of rations increased the number of male smokers in Japan to 83.7% in 1966. Smoking was a luxury for this generation in Japan and a way of being social, so all spaces – offices, apartments, cafes, restaurants, trains and theatres – were smoke-friendly, needless to say, the government`s self-interest in the wealth of the tobacco industry had something to do with the fact that smoking was completely unregulated. In 1985, the monopoly ended and Japan Tobacco Inc. (known as JT) was formed, and although it was a privately held publicly traded company, it was still owned by the Ministry of Finance. The government slowly sold shares of JT and by 2003 they had sold a third of the company and 50% in 2013. However, by law, the Department of Finance is required to own at least one-third of the CT. The legislation aims to reduce the risk of second-hand smoke ahead of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics amid international calls for smoke-free games. But ruling party lawmakers, with close ties to the tobacco and restaurant industries, opted for a watered-down version. In Japan, it is illegal to sell e-cigarettes containing nicotine because they are classified as drugs and have not yet been approved in this way. However, Japanese vapers can import up to a month of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes for personal use.

Nicotine-free e-cigarettes are not regulated. There are restrictions on indoor vaping in public places. The current prevalence of e-cigarette vaping among adults is 1.9%. 11.4% of the population has already tried vaping e-cigarettes. The « Smoking Ban for Minors » law, enacted in Japan in 1990, states that a parent who tacitly allows their child to smoke and those who sell tobacco to minors know that it is for their own use will be punished. However, retailers are unlikely to determine the age of buyers who appear to be minors and whether the tobacco is for personal use. The purchase of tobacco by minors has been tested in tobacco shops in Tokyo and the city of Oiya, a suburb near Tokyo. A 17-year-old high school girl in Omiya and a 14-year-old schoolboy in Tokyo, both in school uniform, were asked to buy a pack of Mild Seven, one of the most popular brands of household cigarettes in Japan.

Both students were asked to give their ages honestly when asked, and when asked, they were asked to say they would smoke it themselves. In Omyya, among 18 business attempts, the student was refused tobacco in one store because he was a minor. In one store, the student was asked to buy tobacco from a vending machine. In Tokyo, the student was able to buy tobacco in 19 of the 20 shops tried without any problems. In the only store where he was having problems, he was asked to buy it from the vending machine owned by the store. Although the ban on the sale of tobacco to minors is important, it is clear that such a ban is in no way effective without a system of strict enforcement by both the health sector and the police. In 2020, Japan produced 13,748 tons of tobacco, a decline of 82.9% since 1990. In Japan, heated tobacco products are regulated under the amended Health Promotion Law.

The amendments to the Act define smoking as the smoke or vapour of burnt or heated tobacco and, therefore, heated tobacco products are subject to the smoking prohibition set out in the amendments. Smoking is completely forbidden in schools, hospitals, children`s institutions, government institutions, private cars and airplanes. In practice, however, the use of heated tobacco products is allowed in other public places such as restaurants, passenger ships and trains. The tax on heated tobacco products is currently at the same level as pipe tobacco under the Tobacco Tax Act, and sales to minors are restricted under section 5 of the No Smoking Act for minors.