| |
| | Indret - Detalle Artículo (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-09-22) |
 | | Finally, in a case of conviction for a public health offence, in which the applicant for constitutional protection (amparo) had alleged violation of the right to privacy in telephone communications, when the evidence obtained by this means was not considered in the decision to convict (STC, Plenary meeting, 81/1998, April 2, 1998: constitutional protection denied). |
 | | In practice, the distinction between fact and law in cassation is often a matter of form, particularly when rulings are reviewed not to ensure the correct interpretation of the law or for the unification of applied case law, but in response to the demands of material justice in a specific case. |
 | | The Constitutional Court granted the appellant protection (amparo), but when the case was sent back to the courtCourt in Soria and the decision of the Constitutional Court was known, the judge in Soria recognized that he must make a new ruling and, unperturbed, on 15.12.1986 reiterated the original decision. |
| www.indret.com /php/contadordownload.php?idA=428&t=1&id=eng&var=53 (6153 words) |
|