LEXIS AND COMPANY

  OUTSOURCING Government is a distortion of the free market by definition. Its sheer existence is a distortion of free market economics: if you have a government, you must support it, which necessitates a robust tax system. Government = Taxation = Regulated Market, to put it simply. True free marketeers would push for the complete removal of government market control: let the market sort it out. There's a large list of additional characteristics that free market capitalists should be searching for that are essential components of a really free market economy, including: There is no immigration restriction or any type of border (free movement of labour); there is no financial regulation; and there is perfect information. Everyone must be aware of everything; else, there will be unintended distortions in the market) and perfect rationality. Until recently, outsourcing technology jobs meant engaging a third-party company to do particularly specialised or very technical duties that wer

  TORTURE, TERRORISM AND POLICE There is no point in stating that an individual's independence must give way to the state's security. In various instances mandated by various legislation, the right of preventative detention of persons in the interest of state security has been affirmed by the courts. In the national interest, the right to question detainees, suspects, or arrestees must take precedence over an individual's right to personal liberty. The Latin maxims salus populi est suprema lex (people's safety is supreme law) and salus republicae est suprema lex (state safety is supreme law) coexist and are not only important and relevant, but also at the heart of the doctrine that an individual's welfare must yield to the welfare of the state. There is no point in stating that an individual's independence must give way to the state's security. In various instances mandated by various legislation, the right of preventative detention of persons in the interes

                           Section 353 IPC  Introduction In a country like India, we constantly hear about crimes like violence, assault, discharge, and other similar offences; these kind of crimes are very frequent in our country and occur virtually every day. Similarly, public officials are frequently exposed to severe risks when carrying out their official tasks, and the law protects them in particular by imposing highly deterrent punishments on those who break the law. Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) deals with this issue, and this article explains it. Before understanding Section 353, it's important to understand what force and assault are, and how they prevent public workers from performing their duties. Force Force is defined under Section 349 of the IPC. It does not constitute an offence; rather, it clarifies the meaning of the term force. It indicates that whenever a person causes motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion to another, that person is

  Doctrine of priority  Introduction                               The doctrine of priority is governed by Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 (TPA). In a case where the court's interests are in conflict, this doctrine aids the court in choosing which party's rights should take precedence over the other. The necessity for this notion emerges when a property transferor deals with the same property with two different people at the same time. As a result, this answers the court's difficulty to a considerable part.   Doctrine of priority   This doctrine is founded on Natural Justice Principles, which state that if rights are granted to two people at separate times, the person who has the advantage in time will also have the advantage in law. This principle, however, only applies in situations where the parties' competing equities are otherwise equal. The Section 48 priority theory is based on the legal adage, who prior est tempore potior est jure, which essen

 law and morality Introduction The world around us is a mix of various views, values, laws, and standards, all of which dictate how one should act in society. To avoid ambiguity and confusion, it is critical to make distinctions between all of these. Law and morality are two such problems that are frequently discussed together. Laws are formal laws that outline what we must and must not do as members of a society. These are put in place by the state and the judiciary in order to establish a basic and enforceable code of conduct for the good of society. Morality on the other hand refers to an informal framework of values, principles, beliefs, customs, and ways of living. Morals are not legally enforceable but there is societal pressure to abide by the same. Relationship between law and morality Law and Morality are two systems that govern the way humans behave. Law is a body of rules and regulations that all people are mandatorily obligated to adhere to. Morals, on the other hand, refer

                   Juvenile crimes in India   Introduction Juvenile criminality is a dismal reality in India. A juvenile is a youngster who has not yet reached the age when they can be held responsible for their illegal conduct in the same way that an adult can. The term juvenile is used to describe a young criminal offender. As a result, a juvenile is a youngster who has been accused of engaging in illegal acts or omissions and has been designated as such under criminal laws. Juveniles have recently been implicated in the most heinous crimes, including murder and gang rape. Although the roots of criminal behaviour in children are complex, certain children's delinquency is fairly predictable early in their lives.   Juvenile crime : an analysis  Child crime is regarded as a juvenile offence in India. Child crimes are delinquent activities performed by minors under the age of a certain age. The dilemma of who should be referred to as a child, on the other hand, arises. Is there an ag

  Judicial process Judicial process is the means through which justice is to be administered and in this process the judges act as an instrument to attain this goal, wherein the judges are expected to nave knowledge- of facts involved and of the law that would apply to the said facts. But the decision arrived at by a judge involves multiple factors in addition to just the logical application or the rule of law to the facts Justice Cardozo's lectures published in a set titled "Nature of Judicial Process" are extremely relevant for this discussion since he mentions the heft responsibility of the judicial rv in the judicial process and in doing so he throws light on the sources that guide a judge and contribute to the final decision arrived at in any given case He first of all imputes on judges to decide cases bv emplovine an objective standard. all the while remaining within the prescribed precincts of the relevant law. What amounts to wrong and right cannot be decided by t