Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 05, 2020, 04:22:02 PM
Refederalisation of Senäts elections would be fine. Whichever gets broader support.

As the incoming SoS, I agree that re-federalizing Senäts elections would be prudent if only to avoid keeping up to date with provincial laws regarding this.

All of these issues is precisely why I wrote the amendment that enlarged the CpI to five justices so that there was never a time when we could have less than a 3-justice panel for appeals and for setting precedent.

It's that time again and I figure no one will mind if I do it so let's get the party started.

I stake my claim to a seat.

Quote from: C. M. Siervicül on August 03, 2020, 06:34:26 AM
Congratulations, D:r Nordselva. I'm sure the Chancery will be in good hands.

Thank you Sir Cresti.

Azul,

After careful consideration and upon consultation with the government, I have decided to retire from the Uppermost Cort as I plan on assuming another public office that is in conflict with my current role.

I have loved my years on the bench and while I am sad to be leaving the Cort, I look forward to the next adventure.

My retirement is effective upon taking up my new office and said office will be announced in due time.

Thank you and I wish the best to my soon to be former colleagues on the UC.

Nice job Glüc and best wishes!

I find it interesting that some of the people who advocate for making all discourse public have to debate their philosophies in the shadows.

Thank your Your Majesty and Honorable Seneschal. I am truly humbled and honored.

Quote from: Miestrâ Schiva, UrN on March 07, 2020, 04:20:10 PM

Quote from: Lüc on March 07, 2020, 01:07:26 PM
Update: this was fixed by changing to a different plugin version. Everything should be in place. Someone should check if the site is accessible through Tapatalk, I don't have the app.

Hey, it works!

Sent from my E0113 using Tapatalk

Using it now actually :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is this a serious attempt at a national honors system? It's been a long time since the king has given any honors. I'd like to see a similar system to the U.K. where the PM advises the monarch on honors. A lot of people have been, in my opinion, overlooked.


***
(Sorry! I hit 'modify' instead of 'quote'.  The content of your post has not been changed.  I shouldn't even be able to do that outside of Immigration???  Eddie.)

Point of clarification: the Uppermost Cort did not find that Justice Tamoran erred. One solitary justice did, in a case that did not set legal precedence. I am not the entire UC and don't speak for it alone.

Also, I don't know if it is established that misapplying justice is in and of itsel a crime, as stated in the resolution.

Congratulations to my new colleague on Uppermost Cort!

Quote from: Viteu on February 24, 2020, 10:47:28 PM

Quote from: Miestrâ Schiva, UrN on February 24, 2020, 09:29:10 PM
Another comment: if we had a functioning National Bar in this country, I would wish that counsel for both the Government and the Respondent* would have been subject to discipline (eg. barred from taking the next UC case) for regular outbursts and talking-out-of-turn in the just-concluded appeal.

In other words: we need a functioning National Bar in this country, because the lawyers are unruly.

(* You can't bar me, I'm the Seneschal  8) )

If I make it on the Cort, this is on my list. The Cort is supposed to set up the bar. I'm sure I could find support.among the justices to get this going.

You have my support and I do hope the king ratifies your election onto the Cort. I and a couple others have been regularly admitted to the bar after successfully passing the old bar exam that Dame Litz once administered. I had at one point offered to take up her work on the Bar but as with many things, this never happened.

If we had a Bar, I would argue that in order to argue before the UC one would need to be admitted or recognized in some way.

Quote from: Miestrâ Schiva, UrN on February 24, 2020, 09:29:10 PM
Another comment: if we had a functioning National Bar in this country, I would wish that counsel for both the Government and the Respondent* would have been subject to discipline (eg. barred from taking the next UC case) for regular outbursts and talking-out-of-turn in the just-concluded appeal.

In other words: we need a functioning National Bar in this country, because the lawyers are unruly.

(* You can't bar me, I'm the Seneschal  8) )

Even without a National Bar currently set up, sanctions for the contempt charges were most definitely something I pondered up to and including disqualification from appearing before the UC for a certain period of time. I don't know if that would have been enforceable, however, so I was forced in the end to stop short.

I believe this may be the first time in Talossan history that a counselor has been found in contempt of Cort (not to mention a Seneschal).

Quote from: Viteu on February 24, 2020, 05:22:20 PM
"Indeed, it can be argued that if a trial did occur, it was rather loose."

Oddly, if the Cort is of the mind that no trial occurred, then there could be no acquittal.  So I find it hard to reconcile the two.  It is implied, of course, that the lower cort erred significantly in its application of law.

That said, in my professional practice, when I have lost or won a motion, I do not really care to relitigate the matter outside of the courtroom.  So that's that. 

In any event, I thank the Cort, the Government, and the Defendant for their hard work on this case.  But I remind everyone involved that this matter is not binding, and to the extent that this provides some persuasive authority, it's that the lower cort's application of the law was erroneous and Panache got off on a technicality.

I was merely reiterating some of the arguments made in the case in summary. I believe a trial did occur so the "loosely" reference was my own thinking.