|
Post by Martì Prevuost on Sept 13, 2012 6:27:15 GMT -6
It is understood that, in accordance with OrgLaw XVI:8 "the fullest opportunity" for all Justices to of the UC to consider the case in question was given.
Seeing as how Justice Ián* Tamorán did not join the decision imposing the injunction against the Magistrate's Cort, can one assume a dissenting opinion be forthcoming?
M.A.G. Prevuost Magistrate
*Edit to clarify Puisine Justice Ián Tamorán as opposed to Senior Justice Tamorán dal Navâ.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2012 7:04:40 GMT -6
This is not a case where we offered a judicial opinion. No judicial opinion was offered, so there really is no reason that a dissenting opinion could, should or would be issued. The matter petitioned was a request for injunction. The two outcomes were to either issue or not issue an injunction.
If a case comes before us that warrants a review of the proceedings and a broader examination of the relevant laws, I would expect that if the decision is not unanimous, you might well see a dissenting opinion. But even that would not change the outcome.
Justice Tamoran participated in our discussion and was given the opportunity to weigh in throughout our discussions, thus meeting the Organic requirements. I do not expect a dissenting opinion on the matter as our ruling was severely limited. It cannot be used as precedent for another ruling and should not be cited in future briefs. A dissenting opinion would only serve to put more information "out there" that cannot be used in future cases, so it would be kind of pointless.
|
|
|
Post by Martì Prevuost on Sept 13, 2012 7:55:39 GMT -6
Thank you. M.A.G. Prevuost Magistrate
|
|