English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

L AW SCHOOL CASE-BOOKS tell us the formal reasons why a case came before the courts, its outcome, the judges' reasons for their decision, and the way in which formal judicial logic links one case to other cases. The commentaries, however, rarely say anything about the social-political context out of which a case developed or the extra-legal values which affected the judges' decision. For a historian or a political scientist, what is left is a burlesque interpretation, one that titillates rather than satisfies. This paper utilizes three disciplines to analyse the constitutional case of Union Colliery v. Bryden? It uses jurisprudence to identify the significance of the case, it relies on historical research to explain the social-political background, and it calls on political science to provide the underlying conceptual framework. From this multidisciplinary perspective the judicial decision is seen as part of the political process, and the route by which it came before the courts is as important as the decision of the court itself. Independently, these three approaches blur reality; combined, they give new insights.

Pawns of the Powerful: The Politics of Litigation in the Union Colliery Case