- Joined
- Nov 15, 2025
- Messages
- 71
- Thread Author
- #1
Sponsor: Multi Man, MP
Type: Act of Parliament
Preamble: The principal rules governing the courts are spread across several Acts. This is suboptimal from an organizational perspective. This Act brings them together in one law and makes the reforms and clarifications set out below.
(b) This Act takes effect immediately upon passage.
(b) The District Court has jurisdiction in all cases throughout the Azalea Isles, subject to section 3(d).
(c) Members of the District Court shall be known as Judges. A seat may remain vacant until filled through the nomination and appointment process under this Act.
(d) Parliament may expand the maximum number of judges in the District Court by motion. Each expansion that brings that Court to no more than three Judges requires a simple majority. An expansion beyond three Judges requires a supermajority of Parliament. Any valid expansion approved before this Act was enacted remains valid.
(e) Each District Court Judge shall act independently in the cases they hear and may not hear an appeal from another Judge's case.
(f) If the presiding Judge is recused or unable to continue, another eligible and available District Court Judge may take the case. The first such Judge to accept the case in its court thread shall preside through completion, subject to the rules on recusal, inability to continue, and completion of cases after a term ends.
(b) Judges shall serve three-month terms. There shall be no limit on reappointment.
(c) A Judge whose term ends while they are presiding over a case shall continue to preside over that case until its completion, even if they are not re-appointed, unless another eligible and available District Court Judge accepts responsibility for the case in its court thread. Except when a judge is re-appointed, a judge may not newly begin to preside over any cases after their term.
(d) Cases concerning treaties, removal from a position created by the Constitution, and Capital Offenses fall within the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction. Such cases shall not be heard first in the District Court.
(b) Every judicial nominee must have at least 24 hours of total playtime and must maintain at least five hours of monthly playtime in each month, effective ten days into that month.
(c) In addition to paragraphs (a) and (b), a person nominated as a Supreme Court Justice shall hold the law profession from the University.
(d) In addition to paragraphs (a) and (b), a person nominated as a Supreme Court Justice shall have more than 96 hours of total playtime.
(e) The qualifications in paragraphs (c) and (d) may not first be achieved after the person is nominated or confirmed.
(b) Any Member of Parliament may nominate a District Court Judge. At least two other Members must support the nomination within 48 hours after it is proposed. If that support is obtained, the nominee shall be called before Parliament for a public hearing.
(c) The Prime Minister shall inform Parliament of a judicial nomination at least 24 hours before the hearing begins.
(d) Parliament as a whole will conduct the hearing through a medium of its choice. A District Court hearing must be public.
(e) A District Court nomination hearing shall last at least 24 hours. The nominee must seriously answer every question asked by a Member.
(f) After the hearing ends, Parliament must debate the nomination for 24 hours.
(g) After that debate, the Speaker must put the nomination to a vote. The voting period shall be 48 hours unless otherwise specified by law, as provided in the Parliamentary Procedure Act. A District Court nomination vote shall last at least 24 hours. The other rules and laws of Parliament governing voting shall apply.
(b) Before a removal vote, the Judge must have at least 48 hours to hear Parliament's charges or concerns, including the specific reasons for proposed removal, and to answer them.
(c) Members may provide or request testimony from other people. A Member may raise a point of order to extend the hearing beyond 48 hours, up to five days in total, so that the testimony can be presented and debated.
(d) When the hearing ends, Parliament must vote on whether to proceed to an impeachment vote.
(b) Any Member may second the proposal on the floor of Parliament.
(c) If a simple majority of votes cast supports the proposal, an official impeachment inquiry shall open into the Justice named in it. Otherwise, the proposal is rejected.
(b) The Member who proposed impeachment shall have 48 hours to make their remarks and set out the case against the Justice.
(c) Members of Parliament shall then have 48 hours to submit questions to the proposing Member, who should answer the relevant questions.
(d) When that period ends, the Justice shall have 48 hours to present a defense.
(e) Once a defense is provided, or the 48 hours expire, Members shall have 48 hours to submit questions to the Justice, who should answer the relevant questions.
(f) During the inquiry, Members may discuss the impeachment trial in private parliamentary chats or request a debate thread for a central discussion.
(g) The inquiry ends when the questioning period in paragraph (e) expires.
(b) The vote shall decide whether to convict and impeach the accused Supreme Court Justice.
(c) If two-thirds of all votes cast support conviction, the Justice is impeached and shall be removed from the Supreme Court.
(d) If that threshold is not met, the impeachment vote fails and the Justice remains on the Supreme Court.
(e) The procedure in sections 7–9 governs parliamentary impeachment. It does not limit the judicial jurisdiction preserved by section 3(d) nor any judicial sanction otherwise authorized by law.
(b) During a legal proceeding, a party may move to recuse a judicial officer when both of these conditions apply:
(c) This section neither prohibits voluntary recusal nor restricts a party's ability to seek recusal on other reasonable grounds.
(b) On a motion under section 11(b), the challenged officer must assess whether a reasonable person would find that they gave guidance contrary to section 11(a), and consider whether to recuse voluntarily. This assessment does not decide the contested motion.
(c) If the officer does not voluntarily recuse, another judicial officer shall independently determine the contested motion. Paragraph (d) governs motions concerning District Court Judges. For any other judicial officer, the reviewing officer must be from the same court or a higher court.
(d) A contested motion to recuse a District Court Judge must be decided by another eligible District Court Judge. If no eligible District Court Judge is available, the Supreme Court shall decide the motion. Deciding the motion does not, by itself, assign the underlying case to the reviewing Judge.
(e) If no eligible District Court Judge is available to take the case after recusal, the case shall automatically proceed to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, another Judge shall take the case.
(f) A Supreme Court Justice who is recused, whether on their own initiative or on a motion, may no longer influence the case, nor may they be involved in it in any way.
(g) A tied Supreme Court ruling shall preserve the status quo.
(b) The Judiciary may modify or create variations from the sample form in paragraph (a), including forms for answers, within its Court Library. These variations must contain separate sections pertaining to identification of parties, listing of factual allegations, listing of legal claims, listing of prayer for relief, and verification under penalty of perjury.
(c) In a civil case, a court may not award relief to a plaintiff on the basis of any legal claim when such legal claim is not properly pleaded. For a legal claim to be properly pleaded, it must satisfy all the following criteria:
(d) Individual legal claims that are not properly pleaded shall be dismissed or struck upon a defendant's motion and may be dismissed or struck sua sponte.
(e) A complaint that contains no properly pleaded legal claims shall be dismissed upon a defendant's motion and may be dismissed sua sponte.
(b) If both parties agree to an expedited trial, the court shall proceed from the end of opening arguments under subsection (a)(vi) directly to subsection (a)(xi) to return a verdict.
(c) If the case involves a class, the three steps in section 16 will take place before opening arguments under subsection (a)(v).
(d) In criminal proceedings, the process in this section applies with the following adaptations:
(b) Individuals may sue a class, or sue as a class, in civil trials.
(c) Individuals who wish to bring a class action lawsuit must all have suffered similar harm from the party they are suing, such as harm from negligence or a particular product. This is known as a common characteristic.
(d) Every individual named as part of a plaintiff class must have agreed to join the class and to the same payout agreement. That agreement will be binding if the class wins. A class suing as the plaintiff may only be represented by one legal entity.
(e) A person suing several individuals as one class will name each individual as part of that class. For example, the class could be a group of tenants who jointly broke a landlord's rules.
(b) Where there are several defense lawyers, each lawyer defends only their own client or clients. The plaintiff will address all points in opening arguments and may call witnesses about the broader case or harm caused by particular members of the defendant class. Each defense lawyer is responsible only for the case against their client or clients.
(c) Evidence that the plaintiff submits during discovery may be applied to the entire defendant class. However, the plaintiff must identify the defendants to whom the testimony of each witness called by the plaintiff applies. This may be every defendant. The judge shall not consider that testimony when deciding the liability of a defendant-class member who was not identified as one of the defendants to whom it applies, nor when deciding that member's damages.
(b) The courts are to hear these requests separately from the case and on an expedited basis.
(c) The process for ruling on a court order shall be as follows:
(b) On a party's motion, the presiding judicial officer may impose civil sanctions if the judicial officer finds that the opposing party has filed excessive requests for court orders in the trial, or a request for a court order where the opposing party knows or should reasonably know that no plausible legal basis for granting the order exists. If the motion for sanctions is granted, the sanctioned party shall be ordered to pay $1,250 to the moving party and $1,250 to the courts for each request for a court order found to meet those grounds and not granted.
(b) A judicial officer with jurisdiction shall grant or deny the request according to the applicable law. A warrant may be issued only if the grounds required by law are established.
(c) The judicial officer may decide the request on the written application with neither advance notice to the person affected nor a hearing with that person.
(d) The judicial officer shall record the decision and brief reasons in writing. An issued warrant shall identify the person or property concerned and specify who may execute it, the authorized action, and its scope and limits.
(e) Special statutory rules governing warrants and lawful exceptions to warrant requirements remain in force. The Ministry of Justice may issue an arrest warrant, including through automatic generation, upon a charge for a misdemeanor or upon conviction of a felony or capital offense. Such warrants do not require judicial approval under this section. This section otherwise does not change the legal grounds for arrest nor the rules governing in-game reports and automatically generated warrants.
(f) Subject to the special statutory warrant rules preserved by paragraph (e), a search warrant requires probable cause for the proposed search. The judicial officer must have reasonably trustworthy information sufficient to warrant a reasonable person to believe a particular person or other entity has committed or is committing a criminal offense. There must also be reasonable grounds to believe that evidence of that offense will be found on the person or at the property to be searched.
(g) The following is a sample judicial warrant application:
(h) The Judiciary may vary this sample form and may accept applications that substantially comply with its key requirements: the applicant's identity, the information required by paragraph (a), and verification. This discretion does not relax the legal grounds for issuing a warrant nor any special statutory requirement preserved by paragraph (e).
(j) The Warrants forum shall have a "Closed Court Warrant" subforum, which shall permit the Ministry of Justice to submit warrant requests in a confidential manner. Only members of the Ministry of Justice and judicial officers shall have access to that subforum.
(b) A case may be appealed only after a final judgment, except for an interlocutory appeal under paragraph (c)(ii).
(c) There are two types of appeal. Both are governed by the standards in section 22 and the procedure in section 23:
(d) An interlocutory appeal must be made during the trial. A post-judgment appeal must be filed no later than ten days after the District Court issues its final judgment, subject to section 30.
(e) An appeal must be requested and conducted in the original case thread. The request must identify the challenged judgment or ruling, each specific alleged error, and the reversal sought. An example request is: “I, [name], request a [post-judgment or interlocutory] appeal of [identify the judgment or ruling] because [identify each alleged error]. I ask the Supreme Court to [state the reversal sought].”
(f) The appellant is the party bringing the appeal. The appellee is the opposing party responding to it.
(g) The Supreme Court shall decide whether to hear the appeal. It shall refuse to hear an appeal that lacks standing under paragraph (e). It may also refuse to hear an appeal where it considers that the challenged ruling was correct or that an error did not sufficiently affect the case. The Court shall apply the standards in section 22 both when assessing the alleged error at this stage and when deciding the appeal. At this permission stage, the Court shall consider the grounds stated in the request and any briefs already filed; a full appeal brief is not required before the summons under paragraph (g)(ii).
(h) The Supreme Court may reprimand an individual by imposing a fee, set by the Court, for a frivolous appeal. This includes repeated appeals without significant legal substance intended to obtain a last-minute reversal.
(i) A fee under paragraph (h) is a procedural monetary sanction, not a criminal punishment. This section neither creates a criminal offense nor alters an offense nor a penalty under the New Criminal Code Act.
(j) The Court Library's Motions and Objections document shall contain an “Appeals” section describing the two types in paragraph (c) and the procedures in sections 21–23.
(k) The following outcomes are available:
(b) Where a challenged decision contains legal conclusions, factual findings, and discretionary determinations, the Court shall apply the relevant standard to each component.
(c) In deciding the merits of an appeal, the Supreme Court shall resolve the appeal only on arguments presented in the parties' briefs or in amicus curiae briefs permitted under section 24, subject to paragraph (d). It may consult relevant law when assessing a briefed argument, but may not decide on a different, unbriefed ground except as allowed by paragraph (d).
(d) The Court may consider an issue not argued in those briefs only if it concerns a constitutional issue affecting the case, or if leaving the issue unanswered would create manifestly unjust and improper results.
(e) This section governs review of the District Court's decision. If the Supreme Court orders a new trial under section 21(k)(iv), the matters set for retrial shall instead be decided under the trial rules in that provision. De novo review of a legal question does not, by itself, authorize a new trial nor a fresh assessment of the facts.
(b) In a post-judgment appeal, the time allowed for each brief's submission should by default be 48 hours. In an interlocutory appeal, the recommended time for each submission is 24 to 48 hours. These lengths may be modified at the discretion of the Supreme Court, including through court rules.
(c) In either type of appeal, the Court shall decide the appeal on the District Court record and the permitted briefs, subject to the following rules on evidence:
(d) After the parties have had the time allowed for the submissions and any permitted evidence hearing, the Supreme Court shall deliberate and issue its ruling under section 21(k), as applicable.
(e) A person acting as counsel in a post-judgment appeal before the Supreme Court must have obtained the in-game Lawyer role by passing the university examination, and must hold that role when the appeal begins and throughout it.
(f) If admitted new evidence or an issue identified under section 22(d) requires supplemental briefs, the Court shall identify the matters to be addressed and allow submissions in the appellant–appellee–appellant order in paragraph (a). The submission periods in paragraph (b) apply. Supplemental briefs shall be confined to those matters.
(b) The applicant should post one message in the case thread identifying themselves, explaining why they wish to submit a brief, and describing its relevance.
(c) The Supreme Court shall consider the request and decide whether to permit the brief. If it refuses permission, that decision is final and the applicant may not resubmit the request.
(d) The main parties may object to an amicus curiae brief.
(e) When the Supreme Court decides to hear an appeal, to hear a case for the first time in a full trial, or to conduct a new trial under section 21(k)(iv), it shall set a deadline for amicus curiae briefs. Each brief must be posted publicly in the case thread before a party is called on to begin closing arguments. The parties must have at least 48 hours to review all such briefs before closing arguments begin.
(f) In either type of appeal, the deadline for amicus curiae briefs shall fall before the appellee is called on to respond under section 23(a)(ii). If any briefs have been permitted and filed, both parties must have at least 48 hours to review them before the appellee is called on to respond. Both parties may address the briefs in their remaining submissions under section 23(a). These requirements replace the closing-argument timing in paragraph (e) when deciding an appeal. A new trial in the Supreme Court follows paragraph (e) instead.
(g) Amicus curiae briefs are not permitted in the District Court.
(b) The fee to summon a witness is $100. The fee per question is $10.
(c) The fee for an appeal is $200 per appeal.
(b) If the plaintiff or prosecution loses the trial, they will be responsible for paying all court filing costs or witness costs associated with that trial.
(c) When the presiding judge or justice chooses to award legal damages to the defendant, that judicial officer shall consider section 26 and the evidence provided during the trial.
(b) A claim filed after that period shall automatically be dismissed for lack of standing.
(c) Criminal actions remain subject to the six-month limitation period in section 13(d) of the New Criminal Code Act, as amended by this Act.
(b) Special statutory procedures, court-fee exemptions, and procedural rights under other Acts continue to apply in the circumstances those Acts prescribe, subject to the express amendments in this Act.
(c) This Act does not displace applicable common law except where its provisions require otherwise.
(b) Cases begun in the First District Court before enactment continue in the District Court, including after remand. Appeals remain with the Supreme Court.
(c) Cases and appeals filed before enactment follow the procedural law in force when filed, despite its repeal. Those filed on or after enactment follow this Act.
(d) Judicial nominations in progress at the time of this Act's enactment follow the qualification and nomination rules in force immediately before enactment, despite repeal.
(e) Civil claims arising from alleged wrongs that occurred before enactment remain subject to the statute of limitations in force at the time that the civil wrong was committed.
(f) Lawful completed steps, orders, judgments, and accrued rights and liabilities remain valid. This Act neither reopens finally determined proceedings nor revives expired claims, appeals, nor lapsed nominations.
(b) Section 3(b)(i) of the Public Defender Program Act is amended as follows:
Type: Act of Parliament
A
BILL
TO
COMPREHENSIVELY DEFINE THE LAW GOVERNING THE JUDICIARY
BILL
TO
COMPREHENSIVELY DEFINE THE LAW GOVERNING THE JUDICIARY
Preamble: The principal rules governing the courts are spread across several Acts. This is suboptimal from an organizational perspective. This Act brings them together in one law and makes the reforms and clarifications set out below.
1. Short title and enactment
(a) This Act may be cited as the "Judiciary Act."(b) This Act takes effect immediately upon passage.
2. District Court establishment, jurisdiction, and composition
(a) The existing First District Court continues as the District Court, a single court serving all of the Azalea Isles. Its lawfully established seats are preserved by this Act's transition provisions.(b) The District Court has jurisdiction in all cases throughout the Azalea Isles, subject to section 3(d).
(c) Members of the District Court shall be known as Judges. A seat may remain vacant until filled through the nomination and appointment process under this Act.
(d) Parliament may expand the maximum number of judges in the District Court by motion. Each expansion that brings that Court to no more than three Judges requires a simple majority. An expansion beyond three Judges requires a supermajority of Parliament. Any valid expansion approved before this Act was enacted remains valid.
(e) Each District Court Judge shall act independently in the cases they hear and may not hear an appeal from another Judge's case.
(i) Subject to paragraph (f) and the recusal provisions of this Act, the Judge who first takes a case will make its rulings and deliver its verdict. That Judge need not consult the other Judges.
(f) If the presiding Judge is recused or unable to continue, another eligible and available District Court Judge may take the case. The first such Judge to accept the case in its court thread shall preside through completion, subject to the rules on recusal, inability to continue, and completion of cases after a term ends.
3. District Court functions and terms
(a) The District Court will hear cases first, except for cases reserved to the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under paragraph (d). A Supreme Court Justice may take the Judge's place only if at least five days have passed since the case was filed with the judiciary, the Judge has not initiated proceedings, and nobody else is available to hear the case, in accordance with the Constitution.(i) A Justice acting under paragraph (a) takes the role of a District Court Judge for that case. This neither prevents nor invalidates a later appeal.
(ii) The Justice may not participate in appellate review of a decision they made while acting as a District Court Judge in that case.
(iii) In deciding whether nobody else is available under paragraph (a), the availability of all eligible District Court Judges must be considered.
(b) Judges shall serve three-month terms. There shall be no limit on reappointment.
(c) A Judge whose term ends while they are presiding over a case shall continue to preside over that case until its completion, even if they are not re-appointed, unless another eligible and available District Court Judge accepts responsibility for the case in its court thread. Except when a judge is re-appointed, a judge may not newly begin to preside over any cases after their term.
(d) Cases concerning treaties, removal from a position created by the Constitution, and Capital Offenses fall within the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction. Such cases shall not be heard first in the District Court.
4. Qualifications for judicial nomination
(a) To be validly nominated, every judicial nominee must meet at least one of these requirements:(i) They are a lawyer and have tried at least one case.
(ii) They have successfully won at least two cases.
(b) Every judicial nominee must have at least 24 hours of total playtime and must maintain at least five hours of monthly playtime in each month, effective ten days into that month.
(c) In addition to paragraphs (a) and (b), a person nominated as a Supreme Court Justice shall hold the law profession from the University.
(d) In addition to paragraphs (a) and (b), a person nominated as a Supreme Court Justice shall have more than 96 hours of total playtime.
(e) The qualifications in paragraphs (c) and (d) may not first be achieved after the person is nominated or confirmed.
5. Judicial nominations and hearings
(a) This section governs parliamentary consideration of nominations to the District Court and the Supreme Court. Supreme Court appointments remain governed by Article 5 of the Constitution.(b) Any Member of Parliament may nominate a District Court Judge. At least two other Members must support the nomination within 48 hours after it is proposed. If that support is obtained, the nominee shall be called before Parliament for a public hearing.
(c) The Prime Minister shall inform Parliament of a judicial nomination at least 24 hours before the hearing begins.
(d) Parliament as a whole will conduct the hearing through a medium of its choice. A District Court hearing must be public.
(i) Every Member shall be allotted at least ten questions for the nominee.
(ii) A Member may yield their questions to another Member or decline to ask questions.
(e) A District Court nomination hearing shall last at least 24 hours. The nominee must seriously answer every question asked by a Member.
(i) Any Member may raise a point of order to extend the hearing by a further 12 to 24 hours.
(ii) The hearing may last no longer than five days.
(iii) The Ministry of Justice shall prosecute a nominee's failure to answer a Member's question when it meets the elements of Contempt of Parliament under section 11(e) of the New Criminal Code Act. The Code's 48-hour period for clearly answering a question applies. This paragraph neither creates an additional criminal offense nor shortens that period.
(f) After the hearing ends, Parliament must debate the nomination for 24 hours.
(g) After that debate, the Speaker must put the nomination to a vote. The voting period shall be 48 hours unless otherwise specified by law, as provided in the Parliamentary Procedure Act. A District Court nomination vote shall last at least 24 hours. The other rules and laws of Parliament governing voting shall apply.
6. Removal of a District Court Judge
(a) A motion to open an impeachment inquiry into a Judge must have the support of at least three Members of Parliament, including the Member who makes the motion.(b) Before a removal vote, the Judge must have at least 48 hours to hear Parliament's charges or concerns, including the specific reasons for proposed removal, and to answer them.
(c) Members may provide or request testimony from other people. A Member may raise a point of order to extend the hearing beyond 48 hours, up to five days in total, so that the testimony can be presented and debated.
(i) Parliament may extend the hearing beyond five days by a simple majority.
(d) When the hearing ends, Parliament must vote on whether to proceed to an impeachment vote.
(i) If a simple majority approves, Parliament will hold the impeachment vote.
(ii) A simple majority in favor of impeachment is sufficient to remove the Judge.
7. Proposing impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice
(a) Any Member of Parliament may propose impeachment proceedings against a Supreme Court Justice for dereliction of constitutional duties or significant crimes committed while in office. The Member must make the proposal on the floor of Parliament and identify the alleged dereliction or significant crimes.(b) Any Member may second the proposal on the floor of Parliament.
(i) Once the proposal is seconded, the Speaker or another member of the presiding office should open a vote within 48 hours. Members must have at least 48 hours to vote.
(ii) Members may continue to discuss the proposal in private parliamentary chats or on the floor.
(c) If a simple majority of votes cast supports the proposal, an official impeachment inquiry shall open into the Justice named in it. Otherwise, the proposal is rejected.
8. Parliamentary impeachment trial
(a) A public thread shall be created for the inquiry opened under section 7(c). The public inquiry and defense procedure in this section constitutes Parliament's impeachment trial under Article 6 of the Constitution.(b) The Member who proposed impeachment shall have 48 hours to make their remarks and set out the case against the Justice.
(i) After finishing their remarks, the Member may yield the remaining time and proceed to paragraph (c).
(c) Members of Parliament shall then have 48 hours to submit questions to the proposing Member, who should answer the relevant questions.
(d) When that period ends, the Justice shall have 48 hours to present a defense.
(e) Once a defense is provided, or the 48 hours expire, Members shall have 48 hours to submit questions to the Justice, who should answer the relevant questions.
(i) The Member making the case against the Justice may not participate in this questioning stage.
(f) During the inquiry, Members may discuss the impeachment trial in private parliamentary chats or request a debate thread for a central discussion.
(g) The inquiry ends when the questioning period in paragraph (e) expires.
9. Supreme Court impeachment vote
(a) The Speaker or presiding office shall open a vote within 48 hours after the inquiry ends. The vote shall last 48 hours.(b) The vote shall decide whether to convict and impeach the accused Supreme Court Justice.
(c) If two-thirds of all votes cast support conviction, the Justice is impeached and shall be removed from the Supreme Court.
(d) If that threshold is not met, the impeachment vote fails and the Justice remains on the Supreme Court.
(e) The procedure in sections 7–9 governs parliamentary impeachment. It does not limit the judicial jurisdiction preserved by section 3(d) nor any judicial sanction otherwise authorized by law.
10. Judicial case payments
(a) Judicial officers, in addition to an in-game salary, shall be paid a per-proceeding payment. When a qualifying judicial proceeding (a case or appeal) finally concludes, payment shall be issued to any judicial officers who presided over that case based upon the amount of time spent presiding on that case, excluding recess:(i) Justices shall be compensated $100 per day.
(ii) Judges shall be compensated $75 per day.
11. Restrictions on public legal guidance
(a) Judges and Justices, referred to as judicial officers, should not publicly give legal guidance on particular conflicts nor on unclear points in statutes, the common law, the Constitution, nor other laws of the Isles. Judicial officers may provide rulings in a case, appeal, or other legal proceeding over which that officer is presiding.(b) During a legal proceeding, a party may move to recuse a judicial officer when both of these conditions apply:
(i) The party believes the officer has given public legal guidance contrary to paragraph (a).
(ii) The guidance concerns a legal question reasonably likely to be material to an unsettled question of law in that proceeding.
(c) This section neither prohibits voluntary recusal nor restricts a party's ability to seek recusal on other reasonable grounds.
12. Conflicts of interest, recusal motions, and their effect
(a) A judicial officer may voluntarily recuse themself. The officer may not decide a contested motion to recuse them from their own case.(i) A judicial officer shall recuse themself from a case, appeal, or other legal proceeding if their participation creates a conflict of interest or the appearance of one. An appearance of a conflict of interest exists if a reasonable person who knows the relevant facts would question the officer's impartiality. This duty applies whether or not a party requests recusal.
(ii) A party may move for recusal on either ground in paragraph (a)(i).
(iii) The duty in paragraph (a)(i) applies independently of the Government Corruption Act. A parliamentary waiver under section 8(b)(iii) of that Act does not excuse compliance with this duty.
(b) On a motion under section 11(b), the challenged officer must assess whether a reasonable person would find that they gave guidance contrary to section 11(a), and consider whether to recuse voluntarily. This assessment does not decide the contested motion.
(c) If the officer does not voluntarily recuse, another judicial officer shall independently determine the contested motion. Paragraph (d) governs motions concerning District Court Judges. For any other judicial officer, the reviewing officer must be from the same court or a higher court.
(i) On a motion under section 11(b), the reviewing officer may involuntarily recuse the challenged officer if a reasonable person would conclude that the challenged officer gave guidance contrary to section 11(a).
(ii) On a motion under paragraph (a)(ii), the reviewing officer shall recuse the challenged officer if either ground in paragraph (a)(i) is established.
(d) A contested motion to recuse a District Court Judge must be decided by another eligible District Court Judge. If no eligible District Court Judge is available, the Supreme Court shall decide the motion. Deciding the motion does not, by itself, assign the underlying case to the reviewing Judge.
(e) If no eligible District Court Judge is available to take the case after recusal, the case shall automatically proceed to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, another Judge shall take the case.
(f) A Supreme Court Justice who is recused, whether on their own initiative or on a motion, may no longer influence the case, nor may they be involved in it in any way.
(g) A tied Supreme Court ruling shall preserve the status quo.
13. Civil complaint formatting and pleading requirements
(a) The following is a sample form for a civil complaint:(b) The Judiciary may modify or create variations from the sample form in paragraph (a), including forms for answers, within its Court Library. These variations must contain separate sections pertaining to identification of parties, listing of factual allegations, listing of legal claims, listing of prayer for relief, and verification under penalty of perjury.
(c) In a civil case, a court may not award relief to a plaintiff on the basis of any legal claim when such legal claim is not properly pleaded. For a legal claim to be properly pleaded, it must satisfy all the following criteria:
(i) The legal claim must be expressly identified within the civil complaint's listing of legal claims;
(ii) The legal claim must be comprehensible to a reasonable person with knowledge of the law;
(iii) The claim must identify how its legal basis derives from statutes, constitutional provisions, guiding principles, or prior court decisions;
(iv) The complaint must include sufficient factual allegations to make the plaintiff’s legal claim plausible. A legal claim is plausible when, if all pleaded factual allegations were presumed to be true, the presumed facts would permit a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable on that claim.
(d) Individual legal claims that are not properly pleaded shall be dismissed or struck upon a defendant's motion and may be dismissed or struck sua sponte.
(e) A complaint that contains no properly pleaded legal claims shall be dismissed upon a defendant's motion and may be dismissed sua sponte.
14. Trial procedure
(a) The trial case process shall be as follows. The plaintiff files a complaint, followed by these steps:(i) A judicial officer reviews the complaint. If it is satisfactory, a summons will be issued to the defendant. That officer becomes the presiding judicial officer.
(ii) The defendant will be notified of the complaint through a court summons and given no less than 48 hours to indicate their presence.
(iii) Once the defendant's presence is assured, the presiding judge will give the defendant time to answer the complaint.
(iv) If the defendant fails to respond to the summons, or fails to answer the complaint, within the applicable time allowed, the plaintiff may be awarded a default judgment. A defendant may still respond and request a stay or vacation of the default judgment if they provide the court with an answer.
(v) The presiding judicial officer will call on the plaintiff to give opening arguments.
(vi) The presiding judicial officer will then call on the defendant to give opening arguments.
(vii) The presiding judicial officer will give time for witnesses to be called. Both parties will have time to declare witnesses, whom the presiding judicial officer will then summon.
(viii) The witnesses will be questioned. The side that called a witness shall ask its questions first. The other side can cross-examine the witness.
(ix) Once all witnesses have been questioned and cross-examined, the presiding judicial officer will allow the plaintiff to give a closing statement.
(x) The presiding judicial officer will then allow the defendant to give a closing statement.
(xi) The court shall go into recess and a verdict will be posted.
(xii) The initial response time given to a party or a witness shall be 48 hours for actions related to all of these trial stages.
(b) If both parties agree to an expedited trial, the court shall proceed from the end of opening arguments under subsection (a)(vi) directly to subsection (a)(xi) to return a verdict.
(c) If the case involves a class, the three steps in section 16 will take place before opening arguments under subsection (a)(v).
(d) In criminal proceedings, the process in this section applies with the following adaptations:
(i) References to the plaintiff mean the prosecution, and references to the complaint mean the charges brought by the prosecution.
(ii) If the defendant fails to respond to the summons, or fails to answer the charges, within the applicable time allowed, the court may proceed in the defendant's absence. Neither the defendant's absence nor their failure to respond establishes guilt by itself. Before convicting the defendant, the court must require the prosecution to prove the charge to the applicable criminal standard of proof.
(iii) The defendant's existing rights to counsel and protections under the Public Defender Program Act remain in force. These include the court's ability to request a public defender for the defendant and the defendant's right to a stay while a public defender request is being processed, unless that right is expressly waived.
(e) Judicial officers may create standing orders governing procedure in their courtrooms beyond those procedures which are specified in statute. Standing orders shall have force of law if such orders are reasonable, consistent with statute, and consistent with the constitution.15. Classes in civil trials
(a) In court cases, a class shall be recognized as a single party.(b) Individuals may sue a class, or sue as a class, in civil trials.
(c) Individuals who wish to bring a class action lawsuit must all have suffered similar harm from the party they are suing, such as harm from negligence or a particular product. This is known as a common characteristic.
(d) Every individual named as part of a plaintiff class must have agreed to join the class and to the same payout agreement. That agreement will be binding if the class wins. A class suing as the plaintiff may only be represented by one legal entity.
(i) Each individual's agreement to join the plaintiff class and to the payout agreement must be compiled into a document. The document is to be submitted to the court with the initial filing. If it is omitted, it may be supplied before the court determines certification under section 16(a)(iii).
(e) A person suing several individuals as one class will name each individual as part of that class. For example, the class could be a group of tenants who jointly broke a landlord's rules.
16. Certification of a class
(a) A lawsuit involving a class will have the following three steps before opening arguments, including when the defendant is a class:(i) The plaintiff will provide proof of a common characteristic among the members of the plaintiff class or defendant class, and all necessary documentation under section 15 if it was not submitted with the initial filing. If the plaintiff is a class, the plaintiff must prove the common characteristic in relation to the defendant: the defendant caused the same injury to each member, or the defendant's same act or failure to act, such as negligence, caused each member's injury. For example, a landlord blocking the entrance to an apartment building would cause an identical injury to each tenant under the Protection of Tenants Act and create a class. If the defendant is a class, the plaintiff must prove that every named member contributed to the specific loss or injury. Five tenants vandalizing their separate apartments would not form a class unless there was proof of coordination. Five tenants jointly vandalizing the building's main lobby would qualify as a class.
(ii) The defendant will be given time to rebut the proposed certification. This may include disputing the plaintiff's class status, individual defendants disputing the common characteristic alleged to make them a class, or both where both parties are classes. The court is encouraged to allow more time for this step if the defendant is a class.
(iii) The presiding judicial officer shall review the arguments and either certify or reject the class. If the class is certified, the case moves forward. If the class is rejected, the case is dismissed.
17. Representation and evidence for defendant classes
(a) Class members alleged to have contributed to the injury in the same way must agree on one lawyer. If members of a defendant class contributed in distinct ways, members with different forms of contribution are each entitled to their own representation.(b) Where there are several defense lawyers, each lawyer defends only their own client or clients. The plaintiff will address all points in opening arguments and may call witnesses about the broader case or harm caused by particular members of the defendant class. Each defense lawyer is responsible only for the case against their client or clients.
(c) Evidence that the plaintiff submits during discovery may be applied to the entire defendant class. However, the plaintiff must identify the defendants to whom the testimony of each witness called by the plaintiff applies. This may be every defendant. The judge shall not consider that testimony when deciding the liability of a defendant-class member who was not identified as one of the defendants to whom it applies, nor when deciding that member's damages.
18. Requests for court orders
(a) Individuals may request court orders in their trials, such as an Asset Preservation Order to prevent assets being wasted or depleted.(b) The courts are to hear these requests separately from the case and on an expedited basis.
(c) The process for ruling on a court order shall be as follows:
(i) An individual shall formally request the order through a Motion For Court Order. For example, the government may request a seizure order, or an individual may request a temporary injunction or another court order.
(ii) If an order is requested in the case filing, the other side or their representative must have received proper notice of the case and been given the applicable time to indicate their presence in the court thread. The hearing may begin once they indicate their presence or that time has expired. If the order is requested during the trial, the other party's presence is assumed.
(iii) After the request is made, the judge will give the person making the motion 24 hours to explain why the order should be granted. If the request is made at the start of the trial, this period follows assurance of both parties' presence or expiration of the other party's time to indicate their presence.
(iv) After being informed by the judge in the thread, the side not requesting the order shall have 24 hours to present its rebuttal.
(v) The judge will rule on the order.
(vi) The case will then continue normally.
19. Court-order requests and civil sanctions
(a) The presiding judicial officer may, at their discretion, unilaterally reject a request for a court order if the judicial officer finds it to be a frivolous request or if a prior request for a substantially similar order has already been rejected in that same case thread.(i) These are the only grounds on which a judge may unilaterally reject a request for a court order. In this section, "unilaterally reject" means refusing the request without a hearing. This restriction does not prevent the judge from denying the requested order on its merits after a hearing.
(b) On a party's motion, the presiding judicial officer may impose civil sanctions if the judicial officer finds that the opposing party has filed excessive requests for court orders in the trial, or a request for a court order where the opposing party knows or should reasonably know that no plausible legal basis for granting the order exists. If the motion for sanctions is granted, the sanctioned party shall be ordered to pay $1,250 to the moving party and $1,250 to the courts for each request for a court order found to meet those grounds and not granted.
20. Judicial warrants
(a) An applicant seeking a judicial warrant shall submit a written request identifying the legal authority relied on, the supporting facts and evidence, the person or property concerned, and the action to be authorized.(b) A judicial officer with jurisdiction shall grant or deny the request according to the applicable law. A warrant may be issued only if the grounds required by law are established.
(c) The judicial officer may decide the request on the written application with neither advance notice to the person affected nor a hearing with that person.
(d) The judicial officer shall record the decision and brief reasons in writing. An issued warrant shall identify the person or property concerned and specify who may execute it, the authorized action, and its scope and limits.
(e) Special statutory rules governing warrants and lawful exceptions to warrant requirements remain in force. The Ministry of Justice may issue an arrest warrant, including through automatic generation, upon a charge for a misdemeanor or upon conviction of a felony or capital offense. Such warrants do not require judicial approval under this section. This section otherwise does not change the legal grounds for arrest nor the rules governing in-game reports and automatically generated warrants.
(f) Subject to the special statutory warrant rules preserved by paragraph (e), a search warrant requires probable cause for the proposed search. The judicial officer must have reasonably trustworthy information sufficient to warrant a reasonable person to believe a particular person or other entity has committed or is committing a criminal offense. There must also be reasonable grounds to believe that evidence of that offense will be found on the person or at the property to be searched.
(g) The following is a sample judicial warrant application:
(h) The Judiciary may vary this sample form and may accept applications that substantially comply with its key requirements: the applicant's identity, the information required by paragraph (a), and verification. This discretion does not relax the legal grounds for issuing a warrant nor any special statutory requirement preserved by paragraph (e).
(j) The Warrants forum shall have a "Closed Court Warrant" subforum, which shall permit the Ministry of Justice to submit warrant requests in a confidential manner. Only members of the Ministry of Justice and judicial officers shall have access to that subforum.
21. Appeals to the Supreme Court
(a) An appeal is a request for the Supreme Court to review a decision of the District Court. Appeals from the District Court shall be heard directly by the Supreme Court.(b) A case may be appealed only after a final judgment, except for an interlocutory appeal under paragraph (c)(ii).
(c) There are two types of appeal. Both are governed by the standards in section 22 and the procedure in section 23:
(i) A post-judgment appeal challenges the final judgment ending a case, including a verdict, or an earlier ruling that affected that judgment. Challenges to rulings on motions and objections may be raised in the same appeal.
(ii) An interlocutory appeal challenges a ruling during a trial where the appellant believes the ruling is incorrect and its harmful effect requires an immediate appeal. Examples include rulings on suppressing evidence, injunctions, warrants, or disclosure of private business information that would seriously disadvantage a party.
(d) An interlocutory appeal must be made during the trial. A post-judgment appeal must be filed no later than ten days after the District Court issues its final judgment, subject to section 30.
(e) An appeal must be requested and conducted in the original case thread. The request must identify the challenged judgment or ruling, each specific alleged error, and the reversal sought. An example request is: “I, [name], request a [post-judgment or interlocutory] appeal of [identify the judgment or ruling] because [identify each alleged error]. I ask the Supreme Court to [state the reversal sought].”
(i) Subject to section 30, an appellant must identify a specific alleged error of law or fact and seek reversal of the affected judgment or ruling in whole or in part to have standing. A specifically identified alleged abuse of discretion also qualifies, but remains subject to the abuse-of-discretion standard in section 22(a)(iii).
(ii) An appeal that identifies no specific alleged error and solely contests the outcome of a verdict or ruling lacks standing and shall be refused. Identifying an alleged error neither establishes that it occurred nor guarantees that the appeal will be heard.
(f) The appellant is the party bringing the appeal. The appellee is the opposing party responding to it.
(g) The Supreme Court shall decide whether to hear the appeal. It shall refuse to hear an appeal that lacks standing under paragraph (e). It may also refuse to hear an appeal where it considers that the challenged ruling was correct or that an error did not sufficiently affect the case. The Court shall apply the standards in section 22 both when assessing the alleged error at this stage and when deciding the appeal. At this permission stage, the Court shall consider the grounds stated in the request and any briefs already filed; a full appeal brief is not required before the summons under paragraph (g)(ii).
(i) Within seven days after the appeal request is filed, the Supreme Court shall post its decision granting or refusing the request in the original case thread.
(ii) If the Court grants the request, that response shall also summon the appellant to submit the appeal brief under section 23(a)(i). A brief already filed may satisfy that summons if the Court accepts it.
(h) The Supreme Court may reprimand an individual by imposing a fee, set by the Court, for a frivolous appeal. This includes repeated appeals without significant legal substance intended to obtain a last-minute reversal.
(i) A fee under paragraph (h) is a procedural monetary sanction, not a criminal punishment. This section neither creates a criminal offense nor alters an offense nor a penalty under the New Criminal Code Act.
(j) The Court Library's Motions and Objections document shall contain an “Appeals” section describing the two types in paragraph (c) and the procedures in sections 21–23.
(k) The following outcomes are available:
(i) Refusal: the Court refuses to hear the appeal under paragraph (g), including because it lacks standing.
(ii) Affirmation: the Court upholds the challenged decision.
(iii) Reversal: the Court overturns the challenged decision in whole or in part.
(1) The Court may substitute the decision that should have been made where the record and any properly admitted new evidence permit that result, or remand the case to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's judgment. The Court shall identify what is reversed, what remains undisturbed, and the further proceedings required.
(2) A remand may be appropriate where the law was applied incorrectly, a procedural error occurred, or further District Court proceedings are needed to give effect to the reversal. On remand, the District Court shall follow the Supreme Court's directions.
(3) If a final judgment has been reversed and remanded, both parties shall have an opportunity to request witnesses relevant to the changed position of the case when the Supreme Court's remand instructions so require. Previously called witnesses should not be recalled for the same questioning if it would add no new information. In such cases, the parties may then make closing arguments before a new verdict.
(4) On remand from an interlocutory appeal, the trial shall continue from the stage required by the Supreme Court's directions.
(iv) New trial in the Supreme Court: the Court sets aside the affected judgment and orders a new trial in the Supreme Court. This remedy is available only in a post-judgment appeal and in extremely narrow circumstances. The Court may order it only if all of the requirements in subparagraphs (1)–(3) are met. Subparagraphs (4)–(8) govern the new trial.
(1) Significant errors in the original trial process prevented a fair and reliable trial.
(2) Neither ordinary appellate relief nor reversal and remand to the District Court can adequately correct those errors.
(3) The Court gives written reasons identifying the errors, explaining why those other remedies are inadequate, and explaining why a new trial in the Supreme Court is necessary. Neither disagreement with the verdict nor a different view of the evidence is, by itself, sufficient.
(4) The new trial shall be conducted by the Supreme Court in its appellate jurisdiction as a continuation of the same case. The original filing date and pleadings remain effective, and no new case filing is required. The order shall identify the judgment or part of the judgment set aside and the matters to be tried afresh.
(5) The trial procedure in section 14 and any applicable class procedures in sections 15–17 shall apply, with the adaptations needed for a new trial in the Supreme Court. The Court shall determine the matters set for retrial afresh, without deferring to the District Court's findings on those matters.
(6) Ordinary trial evidence rules apply. The restriction on new evidence in section 23(c) does not apply to the new trial. Evidence must still be relevant and otherwise admissible, and the ordinary burdens of proof and protections under section 29 remain in force.
(7) Existing rights to counsel and public-defender protections continue, including an applicable right to a stay while a public-defender request is processed. Section 23(e)'s counsel qualification continues throughout this post-judgment appeal, including the new trial. The recusal rules and the prohibition on a Justice reviewing their own District Court decision remain applicable.
(8) Amicus curiae briefs follow the trial-stage procedure in section 24(e). The resulting judgment is a judgment of the Supreme Court in the appeal.
22. Standards and scope of appellate review
(a) The Supreme Court shall apply the following standards to both post-judgment appeals and interlocutory appeals:(i) Questions of law shall be reviewed de novo. The Supreme Court shall decide the legal question for itself, without deferring to the District Court's legal conclusion.
(ii) A finding of fact may be overturned only if it is clearly erroneous. After reviewing the District Court record and any new evidence admitted under section 23(c), the Supreme Court must be firmly convinced that the finding is mistaken. Preferring another view of the evidence is not enough.
(iii) A discretionary determination by a judicial officer may be overturned only for abuse of discretion. The determination must fall outside the range of reasonable choices permitted by the law and the record. Preferring a different reasonable choice is not enough.
(b) Where a challenged decision contains legal conclusions, factual findings, and discretionary determinations, the Court shall apply the relevant standard to each component.
(c) In deciding the merits of an appeal, the Supreme Court shall resolve the appeal only on arguments presented in the parties' briefs or in amicus curiae briefs permitted under section 24, subject to paragraph (d). It may consult relevant law when assessing a briefed argument, but may not decide on a different, unbriefed ground except as allowed by paragraph (d).
(d) The Court may consider an issue not argued in those briefs only if it concerns a constitutional issue affecting the case, or if leaving the issue unanswered would create manifestly unjust and improper results.
(i) Before deciding such an issue, the Court shall identify it, state why the exception applies, and give the parties notice and an opportunity to address it through supplemental briefs under section 23(f).
(ii) These exceptions neither give standing to an appeal that lacks it under section 21(e) nor permit evidence that fails the requirements of section 23(c).
(e) This section governs review of the District Court's decision. If the Supreme Court orders a new trial under section 21(k)(iv), the matters set for retrial shall instead be decided under the trial rules in that provision. De novo review of a legal question does not, by itself, authorize a new trial nor a fresh assessment of the facts.
23. Appeal submissions, evidence, and counsel
(a) After the Supreme Court agrees to hear a post-judgment appeal or an interlocutory appeal, the parties shall be allowed these written submissions in order:(i) An appeal brief from the appellant identifying each specific alleged error of law, error of fact, or abuse of discretion, explaining it under the applicable standard of review, and stating the relief sought.
(ii) A response from the appellee.
(iii) A final rebuttal from the appellant.
(b) In a post-judgment appeal, the time allowed for each brief's submission should by default be 48 hours. In an interlocutory appeal, the recommended time for each submission is 24 to 48 hours. These lengths may be modified at the discretion of the Supreme Court, including through court rules.
(c) In either type of appeal, the Court shall decide the appeal on the District Court record and the permitted briefs, subject to the following rules on evidence:
(i) New evidence may not be introduced unless it has come to light and the party seeking to rely on it shows that it was not identified during the trial and could not have been identified then with reasonable due diligence. For an interlocutory appeal, this test concerns the proceedings up to the challenged ruling. The evidence must also be relevant and otherwise admissible.
(ii) The party must apply to the Court, identify the proposed evidence, explain its relevance, and state when and how it was discovered and why reasonable due diligence could not have identified it earlier. The Court shall give the opposing party an opportunity to respond before deciding whether to admit it.
(iii) If qualifying new evidence includes witness testimony, the Court may receive that testimony in a limited evidentiary hearing. Both parties must have an opportunity to question the witness and address the evidence. Such a hearing is confined to the qualifying evidence and does not, by itself, authorize a new trial.
(iv) Supplying material actually presented to the District Court but omitted from the appellate record is not introducing new evidence. The Court may also examine an item offered but excluded below to decide whether its exclusion was erroneous. Examining an excluded item for that purpose does not, by itself, admit it as proof of the underlying facts.
(v) These provisions do not displace evidentiary privileges, constitutional protections, nor other rules of admissibility. Ordinary trial evidence rules apply if the Court orders a new trial in the Supreme Court under section 21(k)(iv).
(d) After the parties have had the time allowed for the submissions and any permitted evidence hearing, the Supreme Court shall deliberate and issue its ruling under section 21(k), as applicable.
(e) A person acting as counsel in a post-judgment appeal before the Supreme Court must have obtained the in-game Lawyer role by passing the university examination, and must hold that role when the appeal begins and throughout it.
(f) If admitted new evidence or an issue identified under section 22(d) requires supplemental briefs, the Court shall identify the matters to be addressed and allow submissions in the appellant–appellee–appellant order in paragraph (a). The submission periods in paragraph (b) apply. Supplemental briefs shall be confined to those matters.
24. Amicus curiae briefs
(a) An amicus curiae brief is a submission by a person or entity that is not affiliated with the parties but has an interest in the case. Such a person or entity may request permission to submit a brief only in the Supreme Court, whether the Court is considering an appeal or hearing a case for the first time.(b) The applicant should post one message in the case thread identifying themselves, explaining why they wish to submit a brief, and describing its relevance.
(c) The Supreme Court shall consider the request and decide whether to permit the brief. If it refuses permission, that decision is final and the applicant may not resubmit the request.
(d) The main parties may object to an amicus curiae brief.
(e) When the Supreme Court decides to hear an appeal, to hear a case for the first time in a full trial, or to conduct a new trial under section 21(k)(iv), it shall set a deadline for amicus curiae briefs. Each brief must be posted publicly in the case thread before a party is called on to begin closing arguments. The parties must have at least 48 hours to review all such briefs before closing arguments begin.
(f) In either type of appeal, the deadline for amicus curiae briefs shall fall before the appellee is called on to respond under section 23(a)(ii). If any briefs have been permitted and filed, both parties must have at least 48 hours to review them before the appellee is called on to respond. Both parties may address the briefs in their remaining submissions under section 23(a). These requirements replace the closing-argument timing in paragraph (e) when deciding an appeal. A new trial in the Supreme Court follows paragraph (e) instead.
(g) Amicus curiae briefs are not permitted in the District Court.
25. Court fees
(a) No fee shall be charged for filing a forum case.(b) The fee to summon a witness is $100. The fee per question is $10.
(c) The fee for an appeal is $200 per appeal.
26. Recognized legal costs
(a) Subject to the adjustments below, the judiciary shall recognize a minimum legal cost of $1,000 per week incurred by parties represented by a lawyer in a trial.(i) The presiding judge or justice may reduce this amount for a particular week if little was achieved, for example if only one statement was submitted.
(ii) The presiding judge or justice may increase this amount for a particular week if substantial legal work was done, for example extensive questioning and cross-examination of several witnesses.
(iii) The amount may be adjusted separately for each side.
(iv) The presiding judge or justice may request private information about how each party's costs are incurred. The request will be made in the court forum thread. Each party will confirm in that thread that they sent the information by private direct message to the presiding judicial officer, but will not publish the information there. The judicial officer will confirm receipt in the thread. The information might include the lawyer-client agreement setting out costs, to check that the legal cost is not excessive.
27. Defendant compensation
(a) Defendants can request payment of any court cost and court-recognized legal fees in their answer to a civil or criminal complaint.(b) If the plaintiff or prosecution loses the trial, they will be responsible for paying all court filing costs or witness costs associated with that trial.
(c) When the presiding judge or justice chooses to award legal damages to the defendant, that judicial officer shall consider section 26 and the evidence provided during the trial.
28. Time for civil claims
(a) Except when otherwise specified in statute for claims arising from a particular civil wrong, a civil claim must be filed within two months after the alleged wrong occurred.(b) A claim filed after that period shall automatically be dismissed for lack of standing.
(c) Criminal actions remain subject to the six-month limitation period in section 13(d) of the New Criminal Code Act, as amended by this Act.
29. Other procedures and rights
(a) Any additional case or judicial filing structures specified in another law shall remain as outlined for the circumstances that law prescribes.(b) Special statutory procedures, court-fee exemptions, and procedural rights under other Acts continue to apply in the circumstances those Acts prescribe, subject to the express amendments in this Act.
(c) This Act does not displace applicable common law except where its provisions require otherwise.
30. Continuity and transition
(a) Existing lawful courts and seats, and valid appointments, continue. Existing terms do not restart. Each incumbent District Court Judge continues in office for the rest of their term.(b) Cases begun in the First District Court before enactment continue in the District Court, including after remand. Appeals remain with the Supreme Court.
(c) Cases and appeals filed before enactment follow the procedural law in force when filed, despite its repeal. Those filed on or after enactment follow this Act.
(d) Judicial nominations in progress at the time of this Act's enactment follow the qualification and nomination rules in force immediately before enactment, despite repeal.
(e) Civil claims arising from alleged wrongs that occurred before enactment remain subject to the statute of limitations in force at the time that the civil wrong was committed.
(f) Lawful completed steps, orders, judgments, and accrued rights and liabilities remain valid. This Act neither reopens finally determined proceedings nor revives expired claims, appeals, nor lapsed nominations.
31. Amendments
(a) Section 13(d) of the New Criminal Code Act is amended as follows:(d) The Statute of Limitations for all actions shall be 6 months.
(d) The limitation period for criminal actions shall be six months. The limitation period for civil claims shall be governed by the Judiciary Act.
(b) Section 3(b)(i) of the Public Defender Program Act is amended as follows:
(i) This may be an option instead of issuing a default judgement at the discretion of the presiding officer.
(i) At the presiding officer's discretion, a request under this subsection may be made instead of proceeding by default under section 14(d) of the Judiciary Act. The proof required by that section and the defendant's existing counsel protections, including the right to a stay under section 5(a) of this Act unless waived, shall remain applicable.
32. Repeals
(a) The following Acts are repealed:(i) Court Reformation Act.
(iii) Judicial Compensation Act.
(iv) Impeachment Procedure Act.
(vi) Civil Suit Reform Act.
(vii) Court Orders Procedure Act.
(viii) Damages Reform Act.
(ix) Cases and Controversies Act.
Last edited: