When I was first learning the law, I learnt that although general British English accepts either judgement or judgment as the spelling, preferring judgement, legal English prefers judgment. And I find that in the law reports too:

‘Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of Smith Bernal Reporting Limited’

(a case selected at random from the BAILII site, which collects cases and legislation and has links to other international collections).

I didn’t realize there was any discussion about this in the U.S.A. – I thought it was always spelt (or spelled) judgment there – , but I see that as long ago as 31st December 2003, Blogbook had an entry on the topic.

bq. My preference has always been to omit the initial “e” for one simple reason: my 1L Civil Procedure professor told the class that “there is no ‘e’ in the word judgment – wait, I mean there is only one ‘e'”.

Handakte WebLAWg links to Courtroom 23+, showing an integrated high-tech courtroom for the Ninth Judicial Circuit of the USA (here is a nice coloured diagram of the judicial circuits), in the Orange County Courthouse.

The site has superb visuals, including a virtual tour of the courtroom (plugin download needed). Despite all its technology, the courtroom looks uncluttered and dignified. There’s also a link to a cartoon about the courtroom.

Here’s some information on what is known as the Ice Cart:

bq. The Ninth Circuit’s constant search for a cost effective high-tech mobile evidence presentation system has taken yet another turn. The Court has developed a low-cost alternative to the sleeker and more expensive models currently on the market. The new system is affectionately known as the ICE Cart (i.e., Inexpensive Court Evidence Cart). The home-grown model includes many, if not all, of the same features of its more famous contemporaries.

bq. The Ninth Circuit’s unit includes the following equipment\ features:
Projector – Toshiba TLP-T721U
Document Camera – Toshiba TLP-T721U
DVD player – Samsung DVD-V2000
VHS player – Samsung DVD-V2000
Whiteboard – Dry-Erase Contact Paper
Laptop Connection
Audio Recorder – Terapin MCR-TX3300 MP3 Recorder
Sound System – Klipsh 75 Watt Speakers w/Sub-woofer
Wireless Audio – Nady 401 Quad unit
Audio Mixer – ROLLS RM65 Hexmix 6 Channel Mixer
Cart – Apollo Multimedia Projector Cart
Rack – Middle Atlantic DR12
Mesh Cover – Polyethylene Extruded Mesh XV1347
Nuts, Bolts, Jacks, Plastic Top, Velcro etc – Home Depot

The Swiss DORES website (Dokumentation zu Recht und Sprache: Documentation on law and language) has a new update. Registration (free of charge) needed. The site gives information on books and news relating to language and law (German). You can look at the full bibliography, in which the new items are marked, or just at the new items. The bibliography contains talks and newspaper articles as well as books. Some of the books are in French and Italian, most in German.

Further information on specific matters opens in a line below (click on the + sign).

Today, for instance, there is a notice of a new edition of Peter Forstmoser and Regina Ogarek, Juristisches Arbeiten. Eine Anleitung für Studierende. Schulthess Verlag. I’ve found this book very useful in understanding citations of Swiss law, and it has a large number of abbreviations at the back.

Here’s the note:

bq. Forstmoser, Peter / Ogorek, Regina: Juristisches Arbeiten. Eine Anleitung für Studierende. 3., überarbeitete Auflage. Zürich: Schulthess 2004, 437 S..
Bei dieser Anleitung zum juristischen Arbeiten für Studierende der Rechtswissenschaft (und nicht zuletzt auch Auskunftei für Nichtjuristen, die mit der Juristerei zu tun haben) handelt es sich um den Nachfolger von Karl Oftingers “Vom Handwerkszeug des Juristen und seiner Schriftstellerei”, und als solcher behandelt das Bändchen relativ ausführlich auch Fragen des Sprachgebrauchs von Juristinnen und Juristen. Die Neuauflage wurde vor allem um viele Hinweise auf elektronische Informationsmöglichkeiten für Juristinnen und Juristen (Internet, CD-ROM) ergänzt.

There are many more entries. Another refers to a group called “Sprache des Rechts” (language of the law) at the Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, which is planning to publish three volumes with de Gruyter. These volumes will collate contributions to conferences and workshops of this working group in recent years: one volume on the comprehensibility of law, one on legal argumentation, and a third on communication in law. A fourth volume is to present the results of the group’s empirical research.

Today’s issue of the Berliner Morgenpost (January 5th) contained almost nothing but good news. Bad news was confined to small boxes (this will have been more obvious in the print edition). So reports Expatica. The editorial (in German, like the rest of the paper) discusses the plan. The main emphasis is on everything that is good about Berlin.

I mentioned ‘Dinner for One’ on New Year’s Day.

Now I have come across an article in the Spiegel Online of December 31st.

It reports that two Germans see the film as ‘banned’ in Britain.

One of them is ‘der Bremer Kulturwissenschaftler Rainer Stollmann’ – a person involved in studies of culture. Stollmann says that the real reason for the refusal to show the sketch is because Freddie Frinton played to lower-class audiences, presumably in places like Blackpool. Anyone who knows how many TV comedians come from that field must realize this is wrong. And if the BBC had anything against the sketch forty years ago, what about ITV?

The other self-appointed expert is Stefan Mayr of the Süddeutsche Zeitung, who has published a book called ‘Dinner for One von A – Z’ in the Eichborn Verlag. Mayr opines that the ‘stiff British’ don’t want to see aristocrats like Sir Toby portrayed as drunkards. In addition, Mayr thinks that Miss Sophie, who is inappropriately familiar to her servants, is similar to Queen Elizabeth II. He describes the piece as ‘ein knallhartes Antimonarchie-Stück’ (a hardcore anti-monarchy sketch).
Only a private TV station has shown ‘Dinner for One’, as part of a programme on ‘New Year customs in Europe’. But secretly, the ‘banned sketch’ is reaching British living rooms. Some copies have even been sent to BBC employees – but there has been no reply!

Really, I have often thought how good Spiegel Online is – so this must just be another case of international misunderstanding!

I mentioned earlier that a date has been set for an inquest on Princess Diana.

Now the Independent has a long and thorough article on the inquest, followed by a short piece on the coroner, Michael Burgess, and a Q and A section on coroners.

The same coroner will be opening the inquest on Dodi Fayed in Surrey. This is a coincidence as he happens to be the coroner both for Surrey and for the Queen’s Household. Inquests have to be held in the case of deaths by accident abroad.

Burgess will have the 6,000 or so pages in the French file. It will probably take him six months to analyse this.

bq. It remains to be seen how much of the French file Mr Burgess will have translated, and how much of it will then be made public. (At the very least, documents in the case have to be made available to lawyers representing all interested parties.) The file consists of more than 300 witness statements, taken by the 30 detectives who worked on the case for two years (interviews with witnesses at the scene; with the photographers; with medical staff; with employees of the Ritz hotel, which the couple had just left; with friends and family of the driver, Henri Paul; and with the two British bodyguards who were travelling with the couple).

There are rumours of a cover-up, and these have been encouraged by the secretive French method of investigation:

bq. The 6,000-page file assembled by Judge Stephan has never been made public. He has never given an interview or a press conference to explain his findings. If he is called to give evidence at the inquests, he will refuse – not because he has something to hide, but because he is still bound by his professional oath of secret d’instruction, or the secrecy of investigation.