|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Sept 9, 2016 6:09:18 GMT -6
I have a few questions about bar admission. If they have been answered before, please direct me to that post/page (I tried to search but didn't find anything).
(1) How does one properly cite El lexhatx? Has the Cort formally or informally adopted the Bluebook? If so, do rules B20/21 dictate or is there a special citation style?
(2) Admission to the Royal Talossan Bar is governed by El Lexhatx (C)(1.6.1.3.1), which requires that an "applicant must ... have been a citizen in good standing for not less than six months." El Lexhatx (C)(1.6.1.3.1). Absent any other direction, I interpret this statute to have some ambiguity as to what qualifies as six months. Thus, two questions present themselves concerning only to the facts of my situation: (1) does the fact that I was a citizen for seven years count towards that six months?; or (2) does the six-month counter start upon an applicant's most recent grant of citizenship? This question may be moot considering other issues discussed below.
(3) El Lexhatx further requires an applicant to have completed a course of study in Talossan Law at the Royal Law Academy, El Lexhatx (C)(1.6.1.3.2), however I cannot find where one might enroll in such a course. Perhaps some direction? however, there is a post from earlier this year/last year about AD administering a course that doesn't seem like it went anywhere. Any idea when that will happen?
(4) Has there been some codification or some type of guideline on civil procedure?
(5) I assume, of course, the Cort entertains suits brought by pro se plaintiffs, even if El Lexhatx offers no guidance on the issue. Is this assumption safe?
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Sept 9, 2016 11:46:01 GMT -6
I had enrolled in that law class, but unfortunately it was cancelled and never renewed. I have been asking for a while about when the bar will be available, but from what I've heard it is still being updated to reflect el Lexhatx.
In regards to your first question, the format Lex.C.1.6.1.3.1 is typically used
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Sept 9, 2016 12:47:54 GMT -6
In regards to your first question, the format Lex.C.1.6.1.3.1 is typically used I personally prefer the abbreviation "Lexh." because xh is a single digraph in Talossan (i.e. the combination of the two letters represents a sound different from the sounds that each letter normally represents when used separately). The numbering format is covered by Lexh. Z.2.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Sept 9, 2016 20:28:29 GMT -6
With a new child and administrative responsibilities in the govt, as well as a new job I began this week, I definitely won't have time to run the law course any time soon. I did have a few people signed up as guest instructors, though, so maybe in the future I'll be able to manage it back into action.
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Sept 10, 2016 15:57:00 GMT -6
Perhaps a change to admission requirements may be in order? For instance, an individual who complete the apprenticeship requirement and scores higher (say 85 or 90%) on the bar may be admitted without taking a course?
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Sept 10, 2016 18:10:31 GMT -6
In light of the shortage of licensed attorneys and the limited resources of the Bar, I am in favour of significantly deregulating the practice of law in Talossa.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Sept 11, 2016 7:38:43 GMT -6
In light of the shortage of licensed attorneys and the limited resources of the Bar, I am in favour of significantly deregulating the practice of law in Talossa. That would be a good start (I may even write a bill about it), but even with deregulation, prospective attorneys would still need to pass the bar, and currently there is no bar to take.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Sept 11, 2016 7:59:57 GMT -6
That would be a good start (I may even write a bill about it), but even with deregulation, prospective attorneys would still need to pass the bar, and currently there is no bar to take. More deregulation! Do away with the bar exam too. Or make passing the bar exam and/or completing a course of study with the Royal Law Academy a qualification for "senior counsel" status or something like that. I'm thinking of proposing that admission to the bar require only that the applicant: 1) Register with the Bar, 2) Certify that he or she has read the Organic Law, el Lexhatx, and any professional rules/regulations adopted by the Bar, and 3) Agree to be subject to the discipline of the Bar.
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Sept 11, 2016 9:39:57 GMT -6
Perhaps not doing away with the bar exam, per se, but allowing for "student admission" or a trial period before full admission. Or a showing that a candidate has received a minimum of one year legal training in their home country with a certification that they have read the Organic Law, el Lexhatx. I would also say encourage the Bar to adopt the MPC, with a few modifications.
|
|
Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN
Puisne Justice; Chancellor of the Royal Talossan Bar; Cunstaval to Florencia
Dame & Former Seneschal
Posts: 1,157
Talossan Since: 4-5-2010
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN on Sept 11, 2016 16:16:24 GMT -6
In answer to question 2, your citizenship starts at the date you originally became a citizen e.g. 7 years ago.
Secondly, whilst I wouldn't be entirely opposed to some loosening of the requirements to enter the Bar, I would be opposed to complete deregulation wherein any can join the Bar by simply applying and making a declaration. Simply put, someone's citizenship could be resting on a Cort case and if it were my citizenship on the line, I would like a lawyer that has demonstrated s/he has some understanding of law and could put forth a well argued legally sound case.
I like the idea of a apprenticeship wherein a student engages in a period of devilling and the person in charge of said devilling would grade the student (within a framework) and then make a recommendation to the Chancellor to admit the student to the Bar, when s/he feels the student is ready and has adequate knowledge.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Sept 12, 2016 17:31:49 GMT -6
Secondly, whilst I wouldn't be entirely opposed to some loosening of the requirements to enter the Bar, I would be opposed to complete deregulation wherein any can join the Bar by simply applying and making a declaration. Simply put, someone's citizenship could be resting on a Cort case and if it were my citizenship on the line, I would like a lawyer that has demonstrated s/he has some understanding of law and could put forth a well argued legally sound case. I like the idea of a apprenticeship wherein a student engages in a period of devilling and the person in charge of said devilling would grade the student (within a framework) and then make a recommendation to the Chancellor to admit the student to the Bar, when s/he feels the student is ready and has adequate knowledge. When it comes to making an official determination that a prospective attorney "has some understanding of law and could put forth a well argued legally sound case", the problem is that we don't have an adequate supply of such attorneys or a functional process for producing more. So realistically, in many cases the question is whether one is to have an attorney of potentially unproven quality or no attorney at all. In principle I like the idea of apprenticeship or devilling as a means of legally study. But again, to be realistic, we need to account for the possibility that such apprentices may need to practice indefinitely under little to no instruction or supervision. Or you might not have anyone prepared to take on an apprentice at all. I think Sir Alexandreu, Epic, and I are the only members of the Bar who are not on the Cort and are currently active on Witt. Not sure about Epic, but I don't think Sir Alexandreu or I can commit to taking on an apprentice anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Sept 13, 2016 15:12:22 GMT -6
We do need to rather bootstrap the process. I like the devilling idea, because such a process will proceed (necessarily) apace with the legal activity in the country as a whole. That is to say, the more lawyering we have, the quicker new lawyers can be turned out to meet demand. And then maybe once we've bootstrapped ourselves up to a certain point, we bring back the idea of a bar exam.
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Sept 17, 2016 12:30:16 GMT -6
As a compromise, what if we temporarily amended the statute to provide a temporary window that will expire on a certain date if the Clark does not renew, for an alternative method to admit new attorneys.
Something like:
The Judiciary Stimulation Act
WHEREAS El Lexhatx § C (1.6) sets out the statutory requirements for admission to the Royal Talossan Bar;
WHEREAS it remains desirable that only those individuals who demonstrate an understanding of Talossan law practice law in the Kingdom of Talossa
WHEREAS it is nonetheless equally important to grow the practice of law in the Kingdom of Talossa
WHEREAS the current statutory scheme remains desirable but inhibits the ability to grow the judiciary
THEREFORE El Lexhatx § C, 1.6 shall be amended to include the following clause:
1.6.1.25 Any member of the Royal Talossan Bar may petition the Chancellor to admit a student who has completed an apprenticeship for a period of no less than five months, for which the attorney and Chancellor shall exercise reasonable discretion, to be admitted to the Royal Talossan bar. Further, during the aforementioned apprenticeship, the attorney may issue a student practice order, allowing said student to practice law, but accepts all ethical and legal issues as their own, within reason, that may arise from that student's work. This clause shall remain the law of the Kingdom of Talossa for a period of no more than two years from the date of enactment, unless renewed by appropriate legislative means.
-------
Should there be a line in there that says something like, "those individuals who seek admission through these means are exempt from the statutory requirements enumerated elsewhere, except for 1.6.1.3.1.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Sept 18, 2016 5:08:41 GMT -6
Adding to this, we may need an overhaul of the Bar structure. I find it all too... undemocratic, to be honest. We have one Chancellor, but she is a Justice, and has extra-Talossan duties, as well. I think a more voting kind of Bar would be more useful, and less restricive. For example, Canungate could have been more swiftly handled, had there been a vote, instead of a reliance upon the Chancellor to act.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Sept 18, 2016 12:13:22 GMT -6
I think you might have accidentally made an argument in favor of the current system, Epic. If there's one thing we didn't need at that time, it was hastier action. Speaking as one of the people most seriously threatened by the controversy -- someone tried to actually get me fired over it! With a baby on the way! -- and as someone who has, to little interest, tried to push forward a legislative response, I can say that we were very lucky our institutions responded with gravity and thought. Prominent Talossans were engaged in hysteria and screaming matches, indulging in hyperbole and apocalypse, over what was (in retrospect) an overblown concern. A Talossan was a criminal; well, then, it has happened before and it will happen again. His crimes were reprehensible, and we don't wish him around; well, then, he will be gone soon enough. Civil liberties protected him from hasty action and slow-acting officials paused before taking immediate action; well, then, the action was taken within a week and no harm came of a few day's delay.
The Chancellor did well, and deserves praise for it.
As to the current discussion, I still endorse the establishment of an apprentice system, until we can return to the bar exam.
|
|