News:

Welcome to Wittenberg!

Main Menu

Recent posts

#91
Whereas, presently the King, Seneschal, and Secretary of State can request an advisory opinion from the Cort pü Inalt, and

Whereas, the Ziu may also want to request an advisory opinion ahead of its considerations.

Therefore, be it enacted by the Ziu of the Kingdom of Talossa that Article VIII, Section which currently reads as:

Article VIII, Section 6
QuoteUntil such time as inferior corts are established, a Judge may sit as a nisi prius cort in all civil and criminal matters.

No decision or order issued by an inferior cort or nisi prius cort shall bind a coordinate cort.

The decisions or orders of the Cort pü Inalt shall bind all lower corts according to the doctrine of stare decisis provided that that the panel was composed of no less than three Judges after necessary recusal. The Cort pü Inalt may, as it deems appropriate, issue decisions or orders that are non-binding provided that it explicitly states that intention in the decision or order.

A nisi prius cort or an inferior cort deviating from binding precedent must state so with clarity and refer the matter for appellate review.

Notwithstanding any contrary proscription, the King, the Secretary of State, or the Senechal may refer an issue to the Cort pü Inalt for an advisory opinion provided that any such panel reviewing the position is composed of no less than three Judges after any necessary recusal, there lacks a live case or controversy that would otherwise determine the issue, and there is a reasonably need for resolution of the question.

A matter arising under the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms is appealable as of right to the Cort pü Inalt. In all other instances, the Cort pü Inalt may not be compelled to exercise its appellate authority. However, when declining to do so, the Cort pü Inalt must issue an order declaring such, and no such declaration shall be deemed as the Cort pü Inalt adopting or setting as binding precedent the appealed from decision or order.

The Cort pü Inalt, and any other cort existing under this article, shall interpret all matters through the lens of the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms.

Any Judge that is a named party in a matter shall recuse himself or herself from hearing any and all parts of the matter.

Is amended to read as follows:

Article VIII, Section 6

QuoteUntil such time as inferior corts are established, a Judge may sit as a nisi prius cort in all civil and criminal matters.

No decision or order issued by an inferior cort or nisi prius cort shall bind a coordinate cort.

The decisions or orders of the Cort pü Inalt shall bind all lower corts according to the doctrine of stare decisis provided that that the panel was composed of no less than three Judges after necessary recusal. The Cort pü Inalt may, as it deems appropriate, issue decisions or orders that are non-binding provided that it explicitly states that intention in the decision or order.

A nisi prius cort or an inferior cort deviating from binding precedent must state so with clarity and refer the matter for appellate review.

Notwithstanding any contrary proscription, the King, the Secretary of State, the Senechal, or Ziu members representing at least one-third of seats in either the Cosa and/or Senate[/b] may refer an issue to the Cort pü Inalt for an advisory opinion provided that any such panel reviewing the position is composed of no less than three Judges after any necessary recusal, there lacks a live case or controversy that would otherwise determine the issue, and there is a reasonably need for resolution of the question.

A matter arising under the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms is appealable as of right to the Cort pü Inalt. In all other instances, the Cort pü Inalt may not be compelled to exercise its appellate authority. However, when declining to do so, the Cort pü Inalt must issue an order declaring such, and no such declaration shall be deemed as the Cort pü Inalt adopting or setting as binding precedent the appealed from decision or order.

The Cort pü Inalt, and any other cort existing under this article, shall interpret all matters through the lens of the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms.

Any Judge that is a named party in a matter shall recuse himself or herself from hearing any and all parts of the matter.

Uréu q'estadra så
Breneir Tzaracomprada (Avocat-Xheneral)
#92
El Senäts/The Senate / Re: 59th Cosâ, 3rd Clark (Febr...
Last post by Ian Plätschisch - February 14, 2024, 05:34:43 PM
Thanks @GV for starting this thread

PER on all
#93
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: CpI Advisory Opinion Expan...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - February 14, 2024, 04:34:12 PM
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 14, 2024, 02:36:02 PMThe A-Xh is not a directly elected role, but acts as part of a collectively responsible Cabinet led by the Seneschal. I think it's right that the Government, represented by the Seneschal, should have the right to ask for an advisory opinion. If the A-Xh feels the need to act independently from (opposed to?) the rest of the Government, we are in constitutional crisis territory and they should resign.

This seems to have missed my point and is needlessly inflammatory. Why would the King and SoS have the right to request an opinion but not the Government's chief legal advisor? I recognize that there is still distrust here but we are still not making sense with our opposition to a common-sense action.
#94
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: CpI Advisory Opinion Expan...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - February 14, 2024, 02:36:02 PM
The A-Xh is not a directly elected role, but acts as part of a collectively responsible Cabinet led by the Seneschal. I think it's right that the Government, represented by the Seneschal, should have the right to ask for an advisory opinion. If the A-Xh feels the need to act independently from (opposed to?) the rest of the Government, we are in constitutional crisis territory and they should resign.
#95
Sorry for my being late on my question, I have to improve my knowledge of the legal processes.
Why should we have the following principle " The fresh trial may not lead to an outcome that would be less favorable to the defendant than the outcome of the previous in absentia trial." ? Can't we imagine that the audition of the defendant and the displayed new elements lead to a worse outcome for the defendant than the initial decision made on a less factual basis ? I will vote Contra for this only reason, as this may lead to a systematic appeal to a fresh trial after a deliberate absence in the first one.
#96
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: The expansion of abuse of ...
Last post by þerxh Sant-Enogat - February 14, 2024, 04:56:45 AM
Thanks @mpf
I had the same thought when reading the abuse of trust act, for which I am in favour but is too limited indeed. I support your proposal.
#97
Wittenberg / Re: Hello to all
Last post by þerxh Sant-Enogat - February 14, 2024, 04:34:02 AM
Quote from: Knobloch on February 14, 2024, 01:32:30 AMHello everyone, I wish everyone here a happy Valentine's Day.
Greetings from rainy Germany

Feliceu Valontì à toct las ameascās es els calignheirs da Talossa ! 💚❤️
#98
Wittenberg / Hello to all
Last post by Knobloch - February 14, 2024, 01:32:30 AM
Hello everyone, I wish everyone here a happy Valentine's Day.
Greetings from rainy Germany
#99
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: CpI Advisory Opinion Expan...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - February 13, 2024, 07:47:34 PM
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 13, 2024, 05:49:34 PMLeaning to oppose this on the grounds of being unnecessary, and suspicious coming from the incumbent A-XH

I think it is reasonable for the prinicipal legal advisor to the Government to be able to seek legal advice from the Judiciary so that they can best advise the Government.

Edited out the last sentence as it is not conducive to the dialogue. This is not a political maneuver. This is something, upon a review of El Lex, after being appointed as A-X that seemed like a common-sense change.
#100
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: CpI Advisory Opinion Expan...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - February 13, 2024, 05:49:34 PM
Leaning to oppose this on the grounds of being unnecessary, and suspicious coming from the incumbent A-XH