首页|The Disputed Constitutionality of the Precedential Practice of the Federal Supreme Court and Its Implications for Oromia Family Law: The Case of Bigamous Marriage in Ethiopia
The Disputed Constitutionality of the Precedential Practice of the Federal Supreme Court and Its Implications for Oromia Family Law: The Case of Bigamous Marriage in Ethiopia
扫码查看
点击上方二维码区域，可以放大扫码查看
原文链接
NSTL
Cambridge Univ Press
The practice of cassation over cassation and its consequent rule of precedent have resulted in a legal quagmire. The impact is evident in the pecuniary disposition of a bigamous marriage with far-reaching legal ramifications for a valid marriage in Ethiopia. In fact, the pecuniary consequences of a bigamous marriage have remained a perplexing challenge in Ethiopia due to, inter alia, the debatable precedential practice of the Federal Supreme Court. Given the constitutionally guaranteed regional autonomy of the regional states to regulate family matters in Ethiopia, the practice has constitutional implications for the application of the Oromia Family Code. This article argues that the federal doctrine of precedent and its enabling legislation not only lack a concrete constitutional basis, but also encroach upon the constitutional autonomy of regional states and the constitutional rights of legitimate spouses. Exploring the constitutional dimensions of the practice and its legal ramifications, the article suggests possible options to change the practice at a regional level.
Precedentcassation over cassationbigamyOromia family lawconstitutionality
Hirko, Sileshi Bedasie
展开 >
Univ Ottawa, Fac Grad Studies Law, Common Law Sect, Ottawa, ON, Canada
NSTL
Cambridge Univ Press
