|
Post by Adm. T.M. Asmourescu, O. Ben. on Jan 19, 2014 7:11:41 GMT -6
Your worship,
With respect to the court, some of the proposed actions are outside the scope of my initial petition. I do not request or in any manner require an accounting of the former Attorney General or his applicable departments. Further investigations may be conducted and future action may be brought, however, that is outside the scope of my request to reverse the inorganic writ of termination which had been issued.
I do, at this time, amend my request if it please the court and ask that the court enjoin the chancery from recognizing the statement of renunciation, since recanted, which I had made in July 2013. While the court has affirmed my citizenship in that no lawful writ was issued, petitioner seeks protection to ensure no further writs are issued based upon that initial statement.
|
|
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 Apr 5, 2014 11:33:00 GMT -6
The Judge’s Usher Calls Out: “All Rise”, Puisne Justice Dame Litz Cjantscheir enters the Courtroom and takes her seat on the bench.
Firstly, I would like to thank all parties to this case for their patience while this Court was in deliberation. The Court has now finished its preliminary deliberation on this case and wishes to announce the following:
Admiral T.M. Asmourescu (hereinafter referred to as “the Petitioner”) lodged on the 3rd March 2014 a omnibus motion with the Court. The Court will now deal with each motion as the Petitioner submitted them:
Pusine Justice Ian Tamoran has consulted with the other members of the Uppermost Court on this motion and has decided after such deliberations to Grant this motion. The case will now be heard en banc.
The Cort will now hear motions 2 and 3 together:
The Cort has agreed that it will hear arguments for and against these motions and the petitioner's petition as originally filed in accordance with Section 3.3 of the Cort Rulebook (Applications of law). All three Justices of the Uppermost Cort have agreed that the public administration of this case will be headed by a single Justice, that Justice being myself and any decision from this Cort will only be made following a private deliberation of all three Justices.
In order to avoid needless repetition, the Cort considers 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 as having already been satisfied and moves onwards to 3.3.3.
Therefore, the Cort hereby invites His Majesty's Chancery (hereinafter referred to as the "Respondent") and/or their Counsel, until 23:59 BST on the 12th April 2014 to file a single brief outlining a recommended course of action for the Cort on the question before it.
The Cort will allow other interested parties to file their single brief(s) in due course. They are not to post their brief(s) until advised to do so by this Cort.
The Cort will deal with Motion 4 from the Petitioner in due course.
Lastly, until the final Judgement of this case is reached, this Cort does order a stay on the Judgement by Justice Ian Tamoran and enjoins the Chancery and all government ministries from the enforcement of the Writ of Termination against the Petitioner issued on the 7th December 2013.
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Apr 10, 2014 9:05:25 GMT -6
In the matter of
T.M. Asmourescu (pro se) versus The Chancery
Txec dal Nordselva, Esq., appearing for the Chancery
Your Honors
The Chancery has reviewed the issues before this honorable Cort and responds now to the request by Puisne Justice Cjantscheir. The Cort has asked the Chancery (the respondent) to outline a recommended course of action and the Chancery is now prepared.
Issues:
1. Does the Chancery believe that the renunciation of T.M. Asmourescu was properly acknowledged as prescribed under Article XVIII of the Organic Law? The Chancery believes that the renunciation was not acknowledged in a timely manner and would therefore have not acted upon it. If it please the Court, the Chancery would like to remind the Court and the Honorable Justices that during the time period the renunciation was first announced, there was an indefinite absence in the office of the Secretary of State. Former Secretary of State Sir Iusti Canun named Marti-Pair Furxheir as his acting Secretary of State some time into the absence.
2. Did the former UnderSecretary of State Beneditsch Ardpresteir hereinafter referred to as “BenArd” have the legal authority granted to him under Organic Law and/or El Lexhatx (formerly known as Statutory Law) to recognize renunciations? The Chancery can find no evidence in Wittenberg or any other official records that BenArd had ever acted legally upon either a renunciation or a grant of citizenship. The Chancery therefore concludes that BenArd did not have the authority vested in him as an Under Secretary. Additionally, under 30RZ11 and now El Lex. Title C 1.1.1, "Members of the Chancery are to be considered as if they were Deputy Secretary of State, without the ability to replace the Secretary should he become available. Members may act in the name of the Secretary of State and perform official business as delegated to them by the Secretary.” However, BenArd was named as Under Secretary of State, a term not defined in statute.
3. On the matter of the backdated Writ of Termination, the Chancery concurs with the ruling by Puisne Justice Tamoran that it was not timely and should not have been backdated to a date prior to T.M. Asmourescu recanting his renunciation.
Recommendation:
Therefore, the Chancery humbly beseeches the Cort to reverse with prejudice the Writ of Termination filed by BenArd and fully recognize the citizenship of T.M. Asmourescu without gaps in his tenure.
The Respondent humbly asks the Cort for the opportunity to respond to supplementary briefs that may be filed in this case. The Respondent also asks that the Cort direct the Attorney General of the Kingdom of Talossa to conduct an investigation into the matter more fully in the case of possible criminal misconduct that may have occurred with regards to the handling of the Writ of Termination.
|
|
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 Apr 13, 2014 8:48:07 GMT -6
The Cort acknowledges the respondent's brief and thanks D:r dal Nordselva for its timely submission.
The Cort will now allow any Talossan who wishes to do so until 23:59 BST on the 20th April 2014 to file a single brief outlining a recommended course of action for the Cort on the question before it.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Apr 13, 2014 10:24:23 GMT -6
If it please the Court, I, Magniloqueu Épiqeu Ac'hlerglünä da Lhiun, a humble citizen of good standing of the Province of Maritiimi-Maxhestic, wish to file a brief, as empowered by Puisne Justice Cjantscheir, recommending a course of action to this most dignified Uppermost Court, with regard to brevity:
If I may, I wish to go back to Section 2 of the Respondent's brief, and address following sentence:
Verily, the term "Under Secretary of State" is not defined in the statute, which states that:
This statute, then, does not say that "Deputy Secretaries of State" are to be considered Members of the Chancery, but quite in the contrary, stipulates that any Member of the Chancery (implying that they may be called anything, even 'cuckoo-chicken-seller'), regardless of what his task is, must be considered as though they were Deputy Secretaries of State. It is of no import that 'Under Secretary of State' is not mentioned as a position in this statute, for the statute does neither enumerate, nor intends to enumerate, the positions in the Chancery which may be given unto citizens. By this, then, the citizen Ardpresteir, colloquially known as "BenArd", was indeed theoretically empowered to issue a Writ of Termination of Citizenship.
Following this digression, I want to turn the Court's attention to the fact, that the Writ was 'backdated', a practice which might be controversial, but we observe the tradition, and should keep in mind, that every now and then, Talossans hop onto the fondly so-called 'Talossan Time Travel Machine'. Whether this tradition was implemented out of malice by Ardpresteir, I cannot say. However, it strikes me very odd, that Ardpresteir should acknowledge Mr Asmourescu's renunciation, after he expresses his wish to return, thus effectively withdrawing his renunciation.
To keep matters short, I recommend to the Court that the Writ of Termination of Citizenship shall be deemed illegal, owing to the fact that the plaintiff has implicitly withdrawn his renunciation of citizenship by way of returning to the Kingdom, before said renunciation of citizenship was officially acknowledged.
Submitted on this Sunday, the 13th of April, in the year of the Common Era 2014 at 5:24 p.m. GMT
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on May 27, 2014 6:27:03 GMT -6
|
|
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 May 27, 2014 12:20:43 GMT -6
Many apologies for my delay, however owing to personal family issues I have had very little spare time of late. These issues have now resolved and I hope to get back into the full swing of things!
The Cort acknowledges the S:reu da Lhiun's brief and thanks him for his submission.
Before the Cort proceeds to 3.3.5, the Cort will ascertain if the Petitioner wishes to file any amendments to his original brief. The Cort will allow till 23:59 BST on Sunday 8th June 2014 for the Petitioner to file his amendments, if any. Should no amendment be filed by this deadline or the Petitioner declines to file a amendment, this Cort will move to 3.3.5. If a amendment is filed on or before this deadline, this Cort will allow the Respondent to file a rebuttal before moving on to 3.3.5.
The Petitioner will be informed of this deadline by email.
|
|
|
Post by Adm. T.M. Asmourescu, O. Ben. on May 29, 2014 20:28:13 GMT -6
I rest my case.
|
|
|
Post by Adm. T.M. Asmourescu, O. Ben. on Jul 3, 2014 17:15:30 GMT -6
If it please the court, both parties seem to be in general agreement as to the resolution of this matter, I humbly request a final order be issued quashing the writ of termination of citizenship and permanently barring any future action on the, since recanted, renunciation of 2013.
|
|