Users browsing this thread:

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 10:31 AM

http://thesouthpacific.x10.mx/thread-2889.html

This Legal Question was submitted by Awe in regards to the old Supreme Court of The South Pacific and whether or not its rulings apply to the current system.

(07-18-2015, 03:11 AM)Awe Wrote: Honourable Justices,

I note that the High Court Case Archives only contain records pertaining to the current judicial entity known as the High Court of the South Pacific.

However, I also note that the mechanism of Legal Questions have existed prior to the establishment of the High Court of the South Pacific, under a previous entity known as the Supreme Court of the South Pacific.

Thus, can the High Court clarify if the rulings made by the Supreme Court of the South Pacific still have any legal bearing, given that the Supreme Court has been succeeded by the High Court as the judicial authority of the South Pacific?

Thank you.

This one might require some actual work. I'll need time to do some research before I come to a decision.

I am a Super Villain

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 11:55 AM

Okay, I'm thinking that rulings made by the old Supreme Court do indeed still have legal bearing, but rulings made by the High Court supersede any ruling made by the old Supreme Court and any rulings made by the Supreme Court in regards to a law that has changed or no longer exists are moot.

Thoughts?

I am a Super Villain

Hileville · 07-18-2015, 03:35 PM

I agree.

Apad · 07-18-2015, 03:48 PM

Im not there yet. This argument is basically eliminating precedence no? I mean if a law has change significantly then sure the ruling wouldnt really apply but the same could be said about the current court as well.

Apad
King of Haldilwe

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 04:21 PM

Precedence is fine, but it is not the deciding factor unless the current law is too ambiguous for an acceptable interpretation. Old rulings can be presented if necessary for a Legal Question or Criminal Case.

I am a Super Villain

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 08:13 PM

Apad Wrote:I mean if a law has change significantly then sure the ruling wouldn't really apply but the same could be said about the current court as well.

But we're not talking about past rulings by the High Court. This is about the Supreme Court. The law has changed dramatically over the last few years and the Supreme Court case archives seem to be inaccessible. I imagine any rulings regarding Criminal Cases still apply, as criminal cases usually involve a personal dispute or actual cases like Treason, Espionage, Electoral Fraud (vote stacking and such) or any ruling that resulted in a perma-ban.

I am a Super Villain

Hileville · 07-18-2015, 08:30 PM

I'm not sure the Supreme Court actually made any legal opinion rulings.

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 09:02 PM

From what little is available, they ruled on:

1.) Article 9 (which the High Court has made a ruling on in a very similar case)
2.) What appears to be an addition to old Admin/Mod forum policy (still part of current policy)

I am a Super Villain

TAC Saxton · 07-18-2015, 09:03 PM

3.) Powers of the Assembly and Delegate/Cabinet on Treaties (Clearly defined in current law)
4.) Voting Thresholds for Treaties and War Declarations (Also clearly defined in current law)

Had to post these separately.

I am a Super Villain

Apad · 07-18-2015, 09:03 PM

it doesnt matter what name attributed to the highest court in TSP is. its not like the law starts from scratch cause we changed some aspects of the court. if the supreme court made legal opinions then they have to be respected unless the high court overturns or has a new interpretation of that ruling or law.

Apad
King of Haldilwe