DOCSLIB.ORG

Louis Milton Willis V. People of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Louis Milton Willis V. People of The For Publication IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS LOUIS MILTON WILLIS, ) S. Ct. Crim. No. 2015-0078 Appellant/Defendant, ) Re: Super. Ct. Crim. No. 74/2014 (STT) ) v. ) ) PEOPLE OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS ) Appellee/Plaintiff. ) ) ) On Appeal from the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands Division of St. Thomas & St. John Superior Court Judge: Hon. Michael C. Dunston Argued: March 13, 2018 Filed: July 11, 2019 Cite as: 2019 VI 25 BEFORE: RHYS S. HODGE, Chief Justice; MARIA M. CABRET, Associate Justice; and IVE ARLINGTON SWAN, Associate Justice. APPEARANCES: Kele C. Onyejekwe, Esq. Appellate Public Defender St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. Attorney for Appellant, Royette V. Russell, Esq. Assistant Attorney General St. Croix, U.S.V.I. Attorney for Appellee. OPINION OF THE COURT CABRET, Associate Justice. ¶ 1 Louis Willis appeals his convictions for conspiracy to defeat or evade tax and aiding and abetting willful failure to collect or pay over tax. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm his Willis v. People 2019 VI 25 S. Ct. Crim. No. 2015-0078 Opinion of the Court Page 2 of 20 convictions on both counts. I. BACKGROUND ¶ 2 From 2000 to 2006, Willis served as the Director of the Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue (“BIR”). From 2002 to 2008, during his tenure as Director, and shortly after his term ended—Willis furnished false tax clearance letters to Gerald Castor—the owner of Balbo Construction, Inc. and Willis’ friend. Willis signed the letters in place of Judith Creighton, the Supervisor of the Tax Records Management Division, who was in charge of issuing tax clearance letters to entities in good standing. ¶ 3 The letters provided by Willis represented that Balbo Construction was current in all of its tax obligations. In fact, Balbo Construction owed BIR payments for gross receipts taxes and had not filed corporate tax returns for a number of years. Thus, prior to receiving assistance from Willis, Castor’s application for a tax clearance letter had been denied by Creighton because Balbo Construction was delinquent in its tax obligations. Because the Department of Licensing annually requires entities and their owners to be current on all taxes prior to obtaining a business license, Balbo Construction used the false letters provided by Willis to obtain a business license from the Department.1 ¶ 4 Moreover, on or around February 14, 2008, Willis prepared gross receipt returns on behalf of Balbo Construction, which underreported its gross receipts for the years 2002–2007. One year later, Balbo Construction paid the outstanding gross receipts tax. After a BIR audit by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the Virgin Islands Office of the Inspector General, the entities discovered Willis’ activities. Specifically, the IRS found that in exchange for the false clearance 1 The Department of Licensing issues business licenses to entities that are behind on their taxes, provided that the entities enter into a payment plan with the Bureau of Internal Affairs to pay the outstanding taxes. Willis v. People 2019 VI 25 S. Ct. Crim. No. 2015-0078 Opinion of the Court Page 3 of 20 letters, Castor, on behalf of Balbo Construction, paid Willis five thousand dollars for “accounting services.” ¶ 5 Based on the preceding facts, the People initiated charges against both Willis and Castor for criminal tax offenses. Castor later entered into a plea agreement with the Government. In exchange for a reduced sentence, Castor entered a guilty plea and agreed to testify on behalf of the Government. ¶ 6 In a motion to dismiss, Willis argued before the Superior Court that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear his case, on the theory that jurisdiction lay exclusively in the District Court by operation of section 22 of the Revised Organic Act of 1954 and section 1612(a) of title 48 of the United States Code. The Superior Court denied his motion to dismiss in a November 10, 2014 order. Trial took place from August 18 through 25, 2015. The jury found Willis guilty of conspiracy to defeat or evade tax in violation of 33 V.I.C. § 1522 (Count I) and aiding and abetting willful failure to collect or pay over tax pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 11 and 33 V.I.C § 1523 (Count 2). As to Count 3, fraud and false statements in violation of 33 V.I.C. § 1525(2), the jury returned a “not guilty” verdict. For the purposes of sentencing, the Superior Court, in an October 1, 2015, judgment and commitment, merged Count 2 with Count 1 and stayed the imposition of a separate sentence for the conviction on Count 2. ¶ 7 On September 25, 2015, Willis filed a timely notice of appeal,2 asserting that there was insufficient evidence to convict him, that he is immune from criminal liability under executive 2 Former V.I. S. CT. R. 5(a)(1), as in effect when the appeal was taken in this case, provided that “[a] notice of appeal filed after the announcement of a judgment or order - but before entry of the judgment or order - is treated as filed on the date of and after the entry of judgment.” Current V.I. R. APP. P. 5(b)(1), provides that “[a] notice of appeal filed after the announcement of a decision, sentence, or order—but before entry of the judgment or order—is treated as filed on the date of and after the entry of judgment.” Because the appellate rules provisions applicable at the time this appeal was commenced and briefed were located in the V.I. Supreme Court Rules but have since been redesignated Willis v. People 2019 VI 25 S. Ct. Crim. No. 2015-0078 Opinion of the Court Page 4 of 20 immunity principles, and that the Superior Court erroneously instructed the jury. However, Willis neglected to assert in his opening brief that the Superior Court had erred in rejecting the subject matter jurisdiction argument he had raised below in his motion to dismiss, effectively abandoning that argument on appeal. See V.I. R. APP. P. 22(m) (providing that “[i]ssues that were . (2) raised or objected to but not briefed . are deemed waived for purposes of appeal,” but also that the Supreme Court may nevertheless address such an issue on appeal “that affects substantial rights”). As a result, on appeal, this Court directed the parties to brief the issue of whether the exercise of jurisdiction in this matter by the Superior Court was proper, in light of the jurisdictional analysis undertaken and ruling made by the Superior Court in People v. Willis, 60 V.I. 60, 67-80 (V.I. Super. Ct. 2014). The People argued that the Superior Court had jurisdiction over the matter, and Willis conceded. Immediately following oral arguments, Willis filed with this Court a “Motion for Leave to Withdraw Assertions in his Brief in Favor of the Superior Court’s Jurisdiction as Improvidently Filed and to Assert that the Superior Court Lacked Jurisdiction.” Although we generally do not allow the filing of motions asserting new legal authorities after oral argument, we granted the motion because issues affecting subject matter jurisdiction may be asserted at any time. Martinez v. Colombian Emeralds, Inc., 51 V.I. 174, 187 (V.I. 2009). II. JURISDICTION AND STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶ 8 We have jurisdiction over “all appeals from the decisions of the courts of the Virgin Islands established by local law[.]” 48 U.S.C. § 1613a(d); see also 4 V.I.C. § 32(a) (granting this Court jurisdiction over “all appeals arising from final judgments, final decrees or final orders of the as the V.I. Rules of Appellate Procedure, and because the substantive content of the current rules is the same as their predecessors, for convenience, citations to the currently-effective rules are used throughout this opinion. Willis v. People 2019 VI 25 S. Ct. Crim. No. 2015-0078 Opinion of the Court Page 5 of 20 Superior Court”). Because the Superior Court’s October 1, 2015 judgment and commitment constitutes a final order, this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. See Allen v. HOVENSA, L.L.C., 59 V.I. 430, 434 (V.I. 2013). Generally, the “trial court's application of law is subject to plenary review, while findings of fact are reviewed for clear error.” Brathwaite v. People, 67 V.I. 609, 613 (V.I. 2017). We exercise plenary review over matters concerning the Superior Court’s exercise of subject matter jurisdiction. See In re Guardianship of Smith, 54 V.I. 517, 520 (V.I. 2010); Judi’s of St. Croix Car Rental v. Weston, 49 V.I. 396, 399 (V.I. 2008). III. DISCUSSION ¶ 9 On appeal, Willis challenges the merits of his convictions on numerous grounds, including purportedly defective jury instructions, the statute of limitations, separation of powers principles, and the sufficiency of the evidence. However, it is well-established that prior to reaching the merits of a case, we must determine whether we have subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute, including whether the Superior Court properly exercised jurisdiction over this case in the first instance. See V.I. Gov't Hosps. & Health Facilities Corp. v. Gov't of the V.I., 50 V.I. 276, 279 (V.I. 2008); see also Rivera-Moreno v. Gov't of the V.I., 61 V.I. 279, 304 (V.I. 2014) (noting that this Court possesses “an independent obligation to determine that the Superior Court properly exercised jurisdiction.”). Having considered the parties’ positions on jurisdiction, we conclude that the Superior Court properly exercised jurisdiction over this matter. Furthermore, as explained in detail below, we find Willis’ arguments on the merits unpersuasive and affirm his convictions on both counts.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • View / Open Reiblich.Pdf
    REIBLICH (DO NOT DELETE) 4/21/2017 3:27 PM JESSE REIBLICH* THOMAS ANKERSEN† Got Guts? The Iconic Streams of the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Law’s Ephemeral Edge Introduction ................................................................................ 72 I. Guts ................................................................................. 74 II. Legal Framework ............................................................ 83 A. Virgin Islands’ Legal History .................................. 83 B. How Virgin Islands Courts Decide Cases................ 89 C. Provisions Currently Addressing Guts .................... 93 III. Legal Status of Guts ........................................................ 94 A. Case Law.................................................................. 94 B. Three Scenarios........................................................ 99 1. Government Owns Guts in Fee Simple............ 100 2. The Government, or a Sub-set of the Public, Possesses Less than Fee Interests in, or Use Rights to, Guts.................................................. 101 a. Customary Use Law .................................. 102 b. The Public Trust Doctrine ......................... 104 3. The Government Has No Property Interest in Guts .................................................................. 108 IV. The Regulatory Lay of the Land ................................... 109 * Fellow, Center for Ocean Solutions, Stanford University. Jesse served as Law Clerk to the Honorable Robert A. Molloy, Superior Court of the Virgin Islands,
    [Show full text]
  • Copenhagen Arbitration Day
    2020 COPENHAGEN ARBITRATION DAY The Arbitrator and the Law April 2, at the House of Industry Welcome to the COPENHAGEN ARBITRATION DAY 2020 Dear Colleagues, The Danish Institute of Arbitration (DIA) and ICC Denmark are very pleased to welcome you to the third Copenhagen Arbitration Day. We are honored to present an interesting program and it is with great pleasure that we thank our speakers, which are some of the most recognized practitioners in the field. The event takes place in the House of Industry - the headquarters of the Confederation of Danish Industry - which is located in the heart of Copenhagen just between the Tivoli Gardens and the Copenhagen City Hall where the vibrant city is mirrored in the ever-evolving color and glass facade of the building. The Copenhagen Arbitration Day is the central event of the Danish arbitration communi- ty’s calendar as it presents an unequalled opportunity to exchange knowledge on trends within the field of international arbitration and to create and renew a network of colleagues and business contacts in a cozy atmosphere. The conference will be followed by a drinks reception and dinner at the historical Hotel Scandic Palace. Situated in City Hall Square, it is just a few minutes walk from the conference venue. During the dinner, the International Arbitrator José Rosell will deliver a keynote address. The Copenhagen Arbitration Day will be followed by the second annual Nordic Arbitra- tion Day on Friday 3 April 2020, which is a full-day conference organized by the young arbitration practitioners’ associations in the Nordic region.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Justice: Functions and Relationship with the Other Public Authorities
    Conférence des Cours constitutionnelles européennes Conference of European Constitutional Courts Konferenz der europäischen Verfassungsgerichte Конференция Eвропейских Kонституционных Cудов CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE: FUNCTIONS AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITIES National report prepared for the XVth Congress of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts by The Supreme Court of Denmark 1 I. THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT’S RELATIONSHIP TO PARLIAMENT AND GOVERNMENT In Denmark constitutional questions are subject to judicial review by the ordinary courts at any level. The answers to the questions below are, thus, based on what is the matter regarding ordinary courts in Denmark when it comes to constitutional justice. 1. The role of Parliament (as the case may be, of the Government) in the procedure for appointing judges to the Constitutional Court. Once appointed, can judges of the Constitutional Court be revoked by that same authority? What could be the grounds/ reasons for such revocation? In Denmark judges are formally appointed by the Queenby via the Ministry of Justice, but the Minister acts upon recommendation from the Council of the Appointment of Judges (dommerudnævelsesrådet). The Council is competent for all appointments to the judiciary, except the President of the Supreme Court, who is elected by and among the Supreme Court judges. The Council is composed of three judges, one practicing lawyer and two members representing the general public. Having considered applications for appointment, the council will submit a motivated recommendation to the Minister, who is supposed to follow the recommendation and has always done. An appointed judge enjoys the constitutional independence according to which he shall obey the law only and may only be dismissed by judgment of the Special Court (Den Særlige Klageret).
    [Show full text]
  • Copenhagen 13Th – 15Th June 2019
    Page | 1 Copenhagen 13th – 15th June 2019 NETWORKS IN A SINGLE MARKET: Competition law and regulated network markets Programme of the 18th Annual Conference co-organised by the Association of European Competition Law Judges, the European Commission & the Maritime and Commercial Court of Denmark Theme Regulated network markets have, over the years, been opened up to competition notwithstanding the challenge of sustaining innovation and investment. National authorities, both competition and regulatory authorities, and both national and EU courts have played and will continue to play significant roles in both public and private law. We shall explore a variety of ways in which competition law can tackle obstacles to such regulated network markets being effectively competitive. Summary Thursday 13th June 2019 Executive Committee Opening Reception Friday 14th June 2019 The Main Conference and Programme for accompanying persons The conference dinner Saturday 15th June 2019 National updates Annual General Meeting of the Association EUROPEAN COMMISSION Page | 2 Sub-topics We envisage four sessions during Friday: 1. Introducing competition and its regulation in energy and telecommunications; 2. Market definition, dominance, mergers and concerns about abuse; 3. Issues in economics, costing and pricing 4. Looking to the future: a. Fresh monopolies, dominance and collective dominance; b. Oligopoly c. Encouraging innovation and investment in the longer term – regulation, competition law enforcement and predictability Host Court We are grateful to the Maritime and Commercial Court that was founded in 1862 for being our host court this year and to Henrik Rothe, the immediate past President and to his successor, Ole Græsbøll Olesen, and to Vice President Mads Bundgaard Larsen, for their work with Danish colleagues on making local arrangements.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 20-303 ================================================================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v. JOSE LUIS VAELLO-MADERO, Respondent. --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- On Petition For Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The First Circuit --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE VIRGIN ISLANDS BAR ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY REVERSAL --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- DWYER ARCE Counsel of Record KUTAK ROCK LLP The Omaha Building 1650 Farnam Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 (402) 346-6000 [email protected] Counsel for Amicus Curiae Virgin Islands Bar Association ================================================================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i QUESTION PRESENTED Is Congress’s authority to arbitrarily discriminate against Americans living in U.S. territories so well established that summary reversal is warranted? ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTION PRESENTED................................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................... ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................. iii I. INTERESTS OF AMICUS CURIAE ......... 1 II. INTRODUCTION ...................................... 2 A.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SUPREME COURT of DENMARK Danish National Report
    THE SUPREME COURT OF DENMARK 30 November 2007 J.nr. HR-2006-04-72 Init SSA Danish National Report For the XIVth Congress of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts Answer to questionnaire concerning problems of legislative omission in constitutional jurisprudence 1.1. There is not a separate Constitutional Court in Denmark, and there are no specific provisions in the Danish Constitution that deal with the competence of the courts to examine the constitutionality of Parliamentary Acts. The Danish Courts have, however, since long clearly stated that they consider it to fall within their competence to examine the constitutionality of Parliamentary Acts, and the Supreme Court has in a judgment from 1999 set a Parliamentary Act aside on grounds that the act was unconstitutional. In Danish legal theory it is accordingly assumed and accepted that a court may set aside a Parliamentary Act as unconstitutional. However, it is assumed that the court may not substitute the Act with something else, i.e. other rules. Since the adoption of the Danish Constitution in 1849, the only instance in Denmark where a Parliament Act – or provisions thereof – has been found unconstitutional was the Supreme Court’s judgment of 19 February 1999 (the ‘Tvind-case’, referred in the legal journal Ugeskrift for Retsvæsen 1999 page 841). In that case, a provision of a Parliamentary Act was found unconstitutional as it denied the plaintiff – a private school – access to judicial review of the right to receive a State grant. The court found that the Act in fact was a final decision in a specific legal dispute.
    [Show full text]
  • Denmark#.Vdw5x2ccsy0.Cleanprint
    https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2015/denmark#.VdW5X2cCSy0.cleanprint Denmark freedomhouse.org The Socialist People’s Party, a member of the governing coalition, left the government in January in protest over the sale of 19 percent of the stock in the state-owned company DONG Energy to the investment banking firm Goldman Sachs. Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt’s minority government remained in power through 2014 despite the loss of the Socialist People’s Party’s 12 seats. Unprecedented numbers of asylum seekers, mostly from Syria, further strained the resources and capacity of Denmark, which has some of the toughest immigration laws in the European Union (EU). The Euroskeptic and anti-immigration Danish People’s Party made the biggest gains in the European Parliament elections in May, with nearly 27 percent of the Danish vote. Political Rights and Civil Liberties: Political Rights: 40 / 40 [Key] A. Electoral Process: 12 / 12 The current constitution, adopted in 1953, established a single-chamber parliament (the Folketing) and retained a monarch, currently Queen Margrethe II, with mostly ceremonial duties. The parliament’s 179 representatives are elected at least once every four years through a system of modified proportional representation. The monarch chooses the prime minister, usually the leader of the majority party or government coalition. Parliamentary elections in 2011 led to a change of government, with Thorning-Schmidt leading the Social Democratic Party to power after forming a coalition with the Social Liberal Party, the Socialist People’s Party, and the Red-Green Party. Although Thorning-Schmidt’s coalition was able to narrowly defeat Rasmussen’s center-right coalition, the Social Democratic Party itself suffered its worst electoral result since 1903 and won fewer seats in Parliament than Rasmussen’s Liberal Party.
    [Show full text]
  • 14Th IATSO Conference
    General Information 14th IATSO Conference September 07-10th 2016 in Copenhagen General Information Table of Contents 1) Arriving in Copenhagen .................................................................................................. 2 2) How to get to the City Center.......................................................................................... 2 3) Conference Venue ......................................................................................................... 3 4) City Hall Reception ......................................................................................................... 4 5) Conference Dinner ......................................................................................................... 5 6) Leisure Activities - Copenhagen (Places to Visit) ........................................................... 6 1 General Information 1) Arriving in Copenhagen You will arrive at Copenhagen Airport, Kastrup – CPH (in Danish: Københavns Lufthavn, Kastrup) 2) How to get to the City Center 2.1. Option A) Subway If you take the “yellow line”, it only takes around 25 minutes to get to the central station. Nørreport station is Copenhagens traffic nerve center. From there, you can take buses, trains and metro to almost everywhere. For more information, please also see Map 1! Map 1: Subway Map 2 General Information 2.2. Option B) Train There is also the possibility to take a train to the city center which takes around 30 minutes. However, trains run less frequently than the subway. Tickets for public
    [Show full text]
  • The Danish Courts – an Organisation in Development
    The Danish Courts – an Organisation in Development Introduction The Danish Courts are going through a period of structural upheaval. Currently the Danish judicial system is undergoing sweeping reforms that will change the structure and routines of the courts. Concurrently, societal developments in Denmark mean that the courts are constantly met by new demands, and the pub- lic has a legitimate expectation that the courts will discharge their duties at the highest level of professional competence, service and efficiency. As a modern organisation, the Danish Courts have to meet these demands and expectations. This article describes how the Danish Courts discharge their duties and reviews the courts' role in Danish society, their structure, duties, val- ues and objectives. The Courts' role in Danish Society The history of the Danish courts goes back several hundred years, and their du- ties and role reflect the sociohistorical development of Danish society. This de- velopment has gained the judiciary more independence and, by implication, the public due-process protection. The Danish Constitution of 1849 was a giant step towards achieving an in- dependent judiciary, because the Danish Constitution includes provisions to en- sure the judiciary's organisational, functional and personal independence. In fact, section 3 of the Danish Constitution establishes the separation of powers, as de- signed by the French philosopher Montesquieu in his work De l'esprit des lois from 1748, i.e. the vesting of the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government in separate bodies. Since the enactment of the Danish Constitution in 1849, the judiciary has gradually assumed the responsibilities of the overall and regulatory authority of the Danish Parliament (the legislature) and the King (in practice: the govern- ment, the executive).
    [Show full text]
  • Download the DUX Traveler Brochure
    COUNTRY 2021 FEATURED HOTELS ISSUE 06 – A THE DUX TRAVELER COUNTRY 2021 FEATURED HOTELS B – ISSUE 06 ISSUE 06 – 1 THE DUX TRAVELER COUNTRY THE DUX TRAVELER ISSUE 06 FEATURED HOTELS EUROPE ASIA BELVEDERE MYKONOS AHN LUH ZHUJIAJIAO WORLDWIDE MYKONOS, GREECE SHANGHAI, CHINA KAPARI NATURAL RESORT THE BURJ AL ARAB JUMEIRAH SANTORINI, GREECE DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES MIAMAI BOUTIQUE HOTEL THE CHEDI MUSCAT HOTEL BOZBURUN, TURKEY MUSCAT, OMAN HOTEL DUXIANA JUMEIRAH EMIRATES TOWERS HELSINGBORG, SWEDEN DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES KRISTIANSTAD, SWEDEN MALMO, SWEDEN JINGSHAN GARDEN HOTEL BEIJING, CHINA NOBIS HOTEL COPENHAGEN COPENHAGEN, DENMARK SOUTH CAPE SPA & SUITE NAMHEA, SOUTH KOREA HOTEL D’ANGLETERRE COPENHAGEN, DENMARK NOBIS HOTEL STOCKHOLM NORTH AMERICA STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN HOTEL SKEPPSHOLMEN STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN THE LANGHAM, NEW YORK, FIFTH AVENUE GRAND HÔTEL NEW YORK CITY STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN THE SURREY BANK HOTEL NEW YORK CITY STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN THE SETAI THE AUDO MIAMI, FLORIDA COPENHAGEN, DENMARK HERITAGE HOUSE RESORT HOTEL DIPLOMAT MENDOCINO, CALIFORNIA STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN SPICER MANSION THE SPARROW HOTEL MYSTIC, CONNECTICUT STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN INN AT WINDMILL LANE HOTEL RIVERTON AMAGANSETT, NEW YORK GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN HOTEL ST. GEORGE HELSINKI, FINLAND HOTEL SALZBURGER HOF BAD GASTEIN, AUSTRIA THE WORLD’S MOST PRESTIGIOUS HOTELS TRUST DUX® With The DUX Bed available in over 100 luxury hotels worldwide, you’re guaranteed a great night’s sleep no matter where you are in the world. Visit DUXIANA.com for featured hotels & promotions. 2 – ISSUE 06 ISSUE 06 – 3 THE WORLD’S MOST PRESTIGIOUS HOTELS TRUST DUX® OVER 150 OF THE WORLD’S FINEST HOTELS REALIZE THAT THE GREATEST LUXURY OF ALL IS A GOOD NIGHT’S SLEEP You know a bed is special when a hotel includes it on its amenities list along with its exclusive spa, award winning restaurants, and white glove concierge service.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Denmark
    Strasbourg, 29 August 2006 CDL-JU(2006)034 Or. Engl./Fr. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) Supreme Court of Denmark Working document for the Circle of Presidents of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts (Vilnius, 7 September 2006) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. Ce document ne sera pas distribué en réunion. Prière de vous munir de cet exemplaire. CDL-JU(2006)034 - 2 - Table of contents A. Description........................................................................................................................2 I. Basic texts ...........................................................................................................................2 II. Composition and organisation ............................................................................................2 1. Structure of the Judiciary................................................................................................2 2. Composition of the Supreme Court................................................................................3 3. Procedure and organisation of the Supreme Court.........................................................3 III. Powers.............................................................................................................................4 IV. Nature and effects of judgments.....................................................................................4 B. The Constitutional Act of Denmark (extracts)..............................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal House of Denmark 2008 Summary the 2008 Annual Report for the Royal House of Denmark Is the Fifth Since 2004
    Annual report | The Royal House of Denmark 2008 Summary The 2008 annual report for the Royal House of Denmark is the fifth since 2004. Reflecting the Court’s desire to keep the public informed, the report describes the duties and functions of the Danish Monarchy, key events during the year, and selected themes relating to The Royal Family. The themes in this year’s report spotlight The Royal Family’s work to promote Danish industry and culture internationally, the New Year levees, and the tradition of inscribing signatures on the windows of Fredensborg Palace. During 2008 members of The Royal Family undertook numerous official visits abroad, spearhead- ing industrial and cultural campaigns focused on Denmark, or helping to raise awareness of humanitarian organisations for which they are patrons. The Queen and The Prince Consort performed two state visits, one early in 2008 to Mexico, and one late in the year to Tanzania. At home in Denmark, The Royal Family made three summer cruises by the Royal Yacht Dannebrog, two with The Queen and The Prince Consort on board, the third with The Crown Prince and The Crown Princess accompanied by their children Prince Christian and Princess Isabella. The major family event in 2008 was the occasion of the wedding of Prince Joachim and Princess Marie on 24th May. The ceremony, which took place in Møgeltønder Church, was followed at close hand by several thousand people, including some 500 representatives of the Danish and international press. A private celebration was held afterwards in Schackenborg Castle. In spring 2008 a new three-year agreement was established between the Court and the Association of Court Employees.
    [Show full text]