LegalForce RAPC represents clients in more than 100 countries around the world. We have earned the trust of companies around the world thanks to our in-depth knowledge of globalization best practices and our internal efficiency in every business and legal process. The concept of res judicata derives from procedural law (procedural procedure) and describes the effect of judicial decisions (judgment) and official decisions. A distinction is made between formal legal force and substantive legal force. The first term is used when a decision can no longer be challenged by an ordinary or temporary appeal. If this formal authority of res judicata applies, the authority of res judicata on the merits determines that a decision on a contested application also applies to the parties, the local authority. Well-established and clearly defined laws allow individuals, corporations and other corporations to regulate their conduct accordingly (United States v. E.C. Investments, Inc., 77 F.3d 327 [9th Cir. 1996]). Before the government can impose civil or criminal liability, a law must be drafted with sufficient accuracy and clarity so that a person with ordinary intelligence knows that certain behaviors are prohibited. When a court is asked to close a paint plant that emits pollutants at an illegal rate, for example, the rule of law requires the government to prove that the plant owner did not operate the business in accordance with publicly known environmental standards.
Members of the state and federal judiciary face a slightly different problem with the rule of law. Every day, judges are asked to interpret and apply legal principles that defy clear presentation. Terms such as “due process”, “due diligence” and “undue influence” do not define themselves. Nor do judges always agree on how these terms should be defined, interpreted or applied. When judges make controversial decisions, they are often accused of deciding cases in accordance with their own personal beliefs, whether political, religious or philosophical, rather than in accordance with the law. A mystery arises when the government acts in strict accordance with well-established and clearly defined legal rules and still produces an outcome that many observers consider unfair or unjust. Before the Civil War, for example, African Americans were systematically deprived of their liberty by carefully written codes prescribing rules and regulations between master and slave. Although these slave codes are often detailed, unambiguous and made public known, their application by the government has yielded negative results. Under the rule of law, no one can be prosecuted for an act that is not punishable.
If the government tries to punish someone for a crime that was not considered criminal at the time it was committed, the rule of law is violated because the government is exceeding its legal powers to punish. The rule of law requires that the government impose responsibility only to the extent permitted by law. The government exceeds its authority when a person is held responsible for an act that was legally permitted from the outset but has been declared illegal retroactively. This principle is reflected in the prohibition of ex post facto laws in the United States Constitution. For example, the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments requires that legal provisions be sufficiently precise to prevent arbitrary or discriminatory application by a prosecutor. Government officials should not have full discretion to prosecute individuals for violating a law so vague or of such broad applicability that impartial administration is not possible. For example, a Florida law prohibiting vagrancy was struck down for reasons of vagueness because it was so generally worded that it encouraged erratic prosecutions and punished normally harmless behavior (Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 92 pp.
Ct. 839, 31 L. Ed. 2d 110 ). LegalForce RAPC specializes in intellectual property law for entrepreneurs and businesses around the world. In particular, we have strengths in the following areas of legal practice: The rule of law requires government to exercise its power in accordance with well-established and clearly written rules, regulations and legal principles. Sometimes a distinction is made between power, will and violence on the one hand and the law on the other. When a public servant acts on the basis of an explicit provision of a written law, he or she is acting within the framework of the rule of law.
But when a government official acts without the imprimatur of a law, he does so by the sheer force of his personal will and power. “Armed force” is a special case that can be an example of unlawful violence or legal coercion, depending on who exercises (or threatens to use) force and their legal right and/or responsibility to do so. In the Indian Penal Code, Section 349 explains the meaning of violence as follows: “It is said that a person applies violence to another when he causes movement, a change of movement or an attitude of movement towards that other, or if he causes a substance such as a movement or a change of movement or an attitude of movement that brings that substance into contact with a part of the body of that other, or with anything that the other person wears or wears, or with something positioned in such a way that this contact affects the feeling of that other person: provided that the person causing the movement or change of movement or adjustment of movement causes such movement, change of motion or adjustment of movement in one of the three ways described below. (First) — By his own physical strength. (Second) — By eliminating a substance in such a way that the movement, modification or cessation of movement occurs without further action on their part or on the part of another person. (Third) – By making an animal move, changing its movements or stopping to move.  In law, violence means unlawful violence or legal coercion. “forced entry” means an expression falling within the category of unlawful violence; “in force” or “forced sale” would be examples of expressions in the category of legal coercion. LegalForce RAPC is a law firm that has received a number of awards for innovation in the legal industry, including being named inc500/5000 the fastest growing company in the United States for two consecutive years. When it is said that something was done “by force”, it usually implies that it was done by actual or threatened violence (“could”), not necessarily by the legal authority (“law”). For example, a person who is forced against his or her will to commit an unlawful act that he or she would not have committed if he or she had not been threatened would not be considered criminally guilty of those acts.
If a citizen threatens another with a weapon without being in danger from the person he is threatening, this would be an example of the illegal expression of armed violence. The same threat made by police officers making a lawful arrest would generally be considered legal coercion because the state has a monopoly on the use of force. During his second term, President Richard M. Nixon, to put the executive branch of the federal government out of reach of a court case. When served with a subpoena ordering him to produce a series of recordings purporting to link him to the Watergate conspiracy and cover-up, Nixon refused to comply, saying that the confidentiality of those recordings was protected from disclosure by absolute and unqualified executive privilege. In United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 94 p. Ct. 3090, 41 L. Ed.
2d 1039 (1974), the Supreme Court disagreed and forced the President to hand over the recordings because the Constitution prohibits any branch of government from unilaterally thwarting the legitimate objectives of a criminal investigation. The rule of law is an ambiguous term that can have different meanings in different contexts. In a context, the term means domination according to the law. No one may be instructed by the government to pay civil damages or suffer criminal sanctions, except in strict accordance with well-established and clearly defined laws and procedures.