Szymon Grabarczuk (Tar Lócesilion) - made a study how many times Wikipedia was cited in Polish courts, by browsing public database of courts' decissions:
https://depot.ceon.pl/handle/123456789/2232 He counted (till 2012) 223 such cases :-) Some uses of Wikipedia by the courts are quite controversial. I mean - it may happed that someone edit or even write an article in order to use it as an argument in the court. I personally would not liked to be judged based on Wikipedia entires :-) 2015-06-17 10:49 GMT+02:00 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>: > To the best of my knowledge, the US Supreme Court has yet to cite > Wikipedia, but US Federal appeals courts have done so. Also, a state > supreme court cited Wikipedia prominently in a decision about insurance > coverage: > > http://abbottlawfirm.com/blog/2012/08/16/utah-supreme-court-cites-wikipedia-in-published-decision/ > > Pine > On Jun 16, 2015 5:35 PM, "Salvador A" <salvador1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi folks! > > > > This month one mexican federal court generated an interesting case law > > related to use of Wikipedia as source of knowledge on trials, specially > in > > law resolutions. The tribunal that solved this was the "Tribunal Federal > de > > Justicia Fiscal y Administrativa". This court is not the supreme court of > > Mexico but is the most important tribunal after that one in all the > matter > > related to tax and administrative law and its precedents are binding for > > all mexican administrative authorities and al the judges on > administrative > > and fiscal law. > > > > The case law is the number VII-J-SS-191 and you can read it in the next > > link: > > > > (only in Spanish) > > > > http://sctj.tfjfa.gob.mx/SCJI/assembly/detalleTesis?idTesis=41716 > > > > The title is at the same time a brief of the content of the precedent, > and > > it can be translated in this way: > > > > *"Wikipedia".- The information that is obtained from this website can > help > > to elucidate some controversial matter, thence the courtrooms of this > > tribunal may use it when ruling.* > > > > Inside the text the court makes a fair clarication: "*It must not be the > > only source of knowledge in which the resolutions are based on [...] the > > judges must care about gathering diversity of sources of information such > > as specialized books, encyclopedia, including the electronic ones, [...] > > and others*." > > > > Maybe is just a curiosity, but for me is ilustrative of the good > reputation > > that our work is getting even in some closed circles as the law practice. > > At least in Mexico is not common to see a court quoting Wikipedia, but > > maybe this first precedent might change the things. > > > > Do you know other similar case laws? > > > > Regards! > > > > [1] > > > > > https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunal_Federal_de_Justicia_Fiscal_y_Administrativa > > -- > > *Salvador Alcántar* > > *@salvador_alc* > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
