This argument is nothing less than a head on attack
on the Judicial Immunity Doctrine, as it challenges the judges reasoning for making a ruling.
This appears to undermine the established principle that the ET may not substitute its decision for that of the employer but only establish whether it fell within the band of reasonable responses Post-Lake decisions
on judicial immunity as applied to disciplinary proceedings are of some assistance in pinpointing its impact.
Not exact matches
Among them are the rights to: bullet joint parenting; bullet joint adoption; bullet joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents); bullet status as next - of - kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; bullet joint insurance policies for home, auto and health; bullet dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support; bullet immigration and residency for partners from other countries; bullet inheritance automatically in the absence of a will; bullet joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment; bullet inheritance of jointly - owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate); bullet benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare; bullet spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home; bullet veterans» discounts
on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns; bullet joint filing of customs claims when traveling; bullet wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children; bullet bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child; bullet decision - making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her; bullet crime victims» recovery benefits; bullet loss of consortium tort benefits; bullet domestic violence protection orders; bullet
judicial protections and evidentiary
immunity; bullet and more...
(2015) Advising and acting for a solicitor and LLP member in relation to an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal concerning the striking out of his PIDA claim
on the basis of
judicial proceedings
immunity (the claim settled shortly before the EAT hearing).
(a) The Claimants» case
on the point at the hearing was made by reference to a Dubai Court of Cassation decision (Central Bank of Sudan v Africa Alpha Capital 1 Co Ltd, Appeal no 480/2012 Commercial, where the defence was put forward that the court lacked jurisdiction under the Vienna and Riyadh Conventions because the Bank was a «public venture forming a part of the government entities of the Republic of Sudan that enjoys
immunity from
judicial proceedings and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the State Courts».
Adjudicator
Immunity: The court also found, with respect to allegations against the statutory tribunal members, that judicial or adjudicator immunity, which applies to both judges and tribunal members, «prohibits lawsuits against courts and tribunals based on their actions as adjudicators» (pa
Immunity: The court also found, with respect to allegations against the statutory tribunal members, that
judicial or adjudicator
immunity, which applies to both judges and tribunal members, «prohibits lawsuits against courts and tribunals based on their actions as adjudicators» (pa
immunity, which applies to both judges and tribunal members, «prohibits lawsuits against courts and tribunals based
on their actions as adjudicators» (para. 61).
The US District Court rejected
immunity for the official by deferring to the views of the executive while the Canadian case reached the decision
on the basis of
judicial interpretation of the domestic tort exception to
immunity.
State courts have also recognized that legislative
immunity provisions enshrined in state constitutions also protect this bedrock principle.12 Moreover, as one Florida appellate court noted, legislative
immunity is integral to the constitutional separation of powers: «The power vested in the legislature under the Florida Constitution would be severely compromised if [the
judicial branch could compel] legislators... to appear in court to explain why they voted a particular way or to describe their process of gathering information
on a bill.»
Ultimately, Judge Laser found that
judicial immunity applied to this case based
on all available court decisions
on the issue.
Judicial immunity was not being challenged by Lake as he did not seek to bring a claim based
on anything that happened at the disciplinary (or its outcome — cf Heath).
The function of absolute
immunity in the performance of
judicial duties is not to shield members of the judiciary from liability for their own misconduct, but rather «to protect their offices from the deterrent effect of suit alleging improper motives where there has been no more than a mistake or a disagreement
on the part of the complaining party with the decision made.»
A denial of
judicial immunity to Judge Bamberger will put every judge in Kentucky under the threat of KBA discipline sanctions if they acted
on representations made by the attorneys or parties who appeared before them.
On the other hand, if the JCC issues a finding of fact that the complained of actions of the judge were not
judicial acts, (i.e. a violation of the criminal code) then the judge should not be protected by
judicial immunity.
On the other hand, if the JCC issues a finding of fact that the complained of actions of the judge were not
judicial acts, then the judge should not be protected by
judicial immunity.
The new claim was rejected by the tribunal
on the basis that the matters he sought to complain about attracted
immunity because they were things said or done in the course of
judicial proceedings.
The Rome Statute; The Rules of Procedure and Evidence; The Elements of Crimes; The Regulations of the Court; The Regulations of the Registry; The Code of Professional Conduct for counsel; The Code of
Judicial Ethics; The Staff Regulations; The Financial Regulations and Rules; The Agreement
on the Privileges and
Immunities of the International Criminal Court; Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations; The Headquarters Agreement with the Host State; Any other material as decided by the Presidency in consultation with the Prosecutor and / or the Registrar.