Knowledge (XXG)

:Notability (law) - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

410:, the title should either be redirected to the article on the case in the lower court (if this case fulfills the requirement of this guideline), or redirected to the section of the Law Report that discusses it. In cases where the judgments are public domain, the case should then be linked to the text of the summary order on Wikisource. 21: 130: 176: 181: 281:
When applying the general notability guideline, the notability of the parties to a case (e.g. celebrities) is not sufficient to establish the notability of that case.
375: 87: 111: 207: 451: 43: 28: 297:
are nevertheless considered notable if they are non-temporary members of a high court as described below. This excludes judges appointed
80: 39: 370:
are assessed by applying the general notability guideline (in practice, they are almost always notable). For example, the topic of
123: 200: 142: 137: 99: 335: 118: 104: 94: 428: 171: 38:
for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use
149: 166: 193: 424: 274: 374:
in general is notable, but an article on the individual Crown Court in Aylesbury should be redirected to a
294: 70: 63: 56: 387: 35: 317:
that fails the general notability guideline is nevertheless considered notable if it is a high court.
233: 432: 346: 339: 324: 305:, or as temporary replacements for recused or otherwise unavailable regular members of the court. 273:
systems) or practically binding (as is generally the case with decisions of the highest courts in
420: 435:) does not prevent the court at issue from being a high court for the purpose of this guideline. 359:
are to a substantial degree not subject to review by other courts. Examples include the several
250:
A court case that fails the general notability guideline is nevertheless notable if it fulfills
331: 302: 266: 356: 290: 221: 350: 262: 419:
The availability of review of some questions of law by other high courts with a narrow
220:
This guideline determines whether the law-related subject of an article that fails the
445: 407: 360: 258:
It is the subject of a reasoned opinion of the highest court in a legal jurisdiction.
371: 270: 15: 241: 320:
For the purpose of this guideline, "high courts" are
289:
Judges who fail other notability guidelines such as
388:User:Bearian/Standards#Notability of attorneys 201: 8: 330:In common law systems, courts that can set 208: 194: 52: 399: 158: 69: 62: 55: 7: 224:(WP:GNG) is nevertheless notable. 14: 452:Knowledge (XXG) failed proposals 19: 336:United States courts of appeals 254:of the following requirements: 1: 222:general notability guideline 64:General notability guideline 182:Why was my article deleted? 131:Organizations and companies 71:Subject-specific guidelines 468: 231: 376:list of individual courts 361:supreme courts of Germany 349:. These are courts whose 177:Common deletion outcomes 42:or initiate a thread at 345:In civil law systems, 351:determinations of law 347:courts of last resort 433:constitutional court 340:state supreme courts 334:. (Examples include 325:International courts 88:Astronomical objects 143:Sports and athletes 112:Geographic features 421:standard of review 303:arbitral tribunals 301:, as is common in 406:In the case of a 332:binding precedent 265:that is formally 218: 217: 172:Guide to deletion 167:Notability essays 51: 50: 459: 436: 417: 411: 404: 315:individual court 244: 210: 203: 196: 53: 44:the village pump 23: 22: 16: 467: 466: 462: 461: 460: 458: 457: 456: 442: 441: 440: 439: 418: 414: 405: 401: 396: 384: 311: 287: 263:legal precedent 248: 247: 240: 236: 230: 214: 154: 47: 20: 12: 11: 5: 465: 463: 455: 454: 444: 443: 438: 437: 412: 398: 397: 395: 392: 391: 390: 383: 380: 368:Types of court 365: 364: 343: 328: 310: 307: 286: 283: 279: 278: 259: 246: 245: 237: 232: 229: 226: 216: 215: 213: 212: 205: 198: 190: 187: 186: 185: 184: 179: 174: 169: 161: 160: 156: 155: 153: 152: 146: 145: 140: 134: 133: 127: 126: 121: 115: 114: 108: 107: 102: 97: 91: 90: 84: 83: 77: 74: 73: 67: 66: 60: 59: 49: 48: 34: 33: 24: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 464: 453: 450: 449: 447: 434: 431:or a special 430: 426: 423:(such as the 422: 416: 413: 409: 408:summary order 403: 400: 393: 389: 386: 385: 382:User criteria 381: 379: 377: 373: 369: 362: 358: 355: 352: 348: 344: 341: 337: 333: 329: 326: 323: 322: 321: 318: 316: 308: 306: 304: 300: 296: 295:WP:POLITICIAN 292: 284: 282: 276: 272: 268: 264: 261:It has set a 260: 257: 256: 255: 253: 243: 239: 238: 235: 227: 225: 223: 211: 206: 204: 199: 197: 192: 191: 189: 188: 183: 180: 178: 175: 173: 170: 168: 165: 164: 163: 162: 157: 151: 148: 147: 144: 141: 139: 136: 135: 132: 129: 128: 125: 122: 120: 117: 116: 113: 110: 109: 106: 103: 101: 98: 96: 93: 92: 89: 86: 85: 82: 79: 78: 76: 75: 72: 68: 65: 61: 58: 54: 45: 41: 40:the talk page 37: 32: 30: 25: 18: 17: 415: 402: 372:Crown Courts 367: 366: 353: 319: 314: 312: 298: 288: 280: 251: 249: 219: 26: 150:Web content 271:common law 57:Notability 27:This is a 277:systems). 275:civil law 81:Academics 36:Consensus 31:proposal. 446:Category 338:or U.S. 242:WP:CASES 234:Shortcut 159:See also 267:binding 124:Numbers 427:, the 309:Courts 299:ad hoc 291:WP:BIO 285:Judges 138:People 100:Events 29:failed 394:Notes 357:facts 228:Cases 119:Music 105:Films 95:Books 429:ECHR 269:(in 425:ECJ 354:and 313:An 293:or 252:any 448:: 378:. 363:.) 342:.) 327:. 209:e 202:t 195:v 46:.

Index

failed
Consensus
the talk page
the village pump
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
Academics
Astronomical objects
Books
Events
Films
Geographic features
Music
Numbers
Organizations and companies
People
Sports and athletes
Web content
Notability essays
Guide to deletion
Common deletion outcomes
Why was my article deleted?
v
t
e
general notability guideline
Shortcut
WP:CASES
legal precedent

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.