| Legal precedent |
|
Your Honour
I suppose this is not a legal question but a question of procedure. Do opinions issued outside of legal rulings (ie: opinions rendered for determinations of non-justiciability or no probable cause etc) have legal precedent and thus can the opinion of the Court in these instances be cited in subsequent Court cases?
Pardon my intrusion upon the Court Your Honour, but will the Court be providing an answer to this question?
The Court has no limitation on what can or cannot be cited in the course of making an argument, provided that what is being cited is relevant to the legal argument being made. To that extent, it is irrelevant whether a certain decision or action is precedential or not, since it can still be relevant to an argument, if anything, as contextual information.
More to the point, each case is unique, with its own particular circumstances and details, so a determination of justiciability or non-justiciability should not necessarily be seen as precedential. The case of in-chambers opinions is particular, since it involves a more extensive document that does offer some legal reasoning on the part of the Court. Those do have some interpretative value, but only insofar as the Court made an initial and relatively superficial reading of the law. That interpretation could very well change, if it was subjected to a challenge via a legal question. In that sense, in-chambers opinions have certain precedential value, but not to the same level as a ruling with a HCLQ, HCRR or HCCC case number. In short, nothing prevents anyone from quoting anything in the course of making a legal argument. Its value as precedent, or lack thereof, is no impediment for that. However, in-chambers opinions do hold some precedential value, albeit lower than that of case rulings, by virtue of being superficial interpretations of the law. Kris Kringle
Chief Justice Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
I thank the Court for its time
Your Honour,
So as to clarify, does 'in-chamber' mean only within the confines of the High Court sub-forum or does this extend to the High Court Discord channel and perhaps in other areas as well, such as the Legislators' Lounge?
An in-chamber opinion is the full explanation for a determination of non-justiciability or a decision not to indict, which is given when a petitioner so requests.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
I thank the Court for the clarification.
It's worth pointing out that it is not the practice of the High Court to provide official opinions or legal advice outside of established procedures. Posts on venues other than the Courtroom, such as the Halls of the Assembly, may be personal statements or clarifications on prior rulings, but they hold no official value.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Former Offices![[-]](https://tspforums.xyz/images/sidr/blue/collapse.png)
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |