Ah okay, I've read it again now and it does only apply to article 26. It seems to state the same thing twice in that regard. Thanks a mill for that. I really am silly!
On Sep 29, 6:04 pm, the gaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry just to add to that last post...look at ART26.2 > > On Sep 29, 5:58 pm, the gaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Yup...it only applies to ART26 references. > > > On Sep 29, 5:56 pm, tiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hey there > > > > I have a very question that may be very silly, in relation to the one > > > judgment rule under Art 34.4.4 and in relation to the article 26 > > > procedure, i.e. Casey suggests that by not disclosing or publishing > > > dissents, it inhibits the development of constitutional > > > jurisprudence. > > > > Why then do notes and books refer to certain judges (dissenting) and > > > in the judgments of more than one judges are available when you read > > > the original judgment. > > > > Am I missing something really basic??!!!- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 Study Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
