No announcement yet.

What does the judge do?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What does the judge do?

    What does the judge go?

    Reasoning, conclusion and inference: these summarise the judge's job

    Two disputants appear before the court. Each has different lists of facts as they perceived them. What is next?

    The judge will ask questions, will listen to each party, will look into the evidence, will weigh the evidence and will rule out any claim that is not supported or that is illegal.

    In the majority of cases, there are several instances where a claim is not documented by either party. The judge, in this case, uses inference. He reads between the lines and tries to reach a conclusion (through reasoning). After giving the disputants ample time for presenting their cases, the judge considers each claim one by one. Claim 1 is correct, claim 2 is invalid, claim 3 is not supported by evidence, counter-claim 5 is valid, etc.

    An example?
    It is not quite uncommon to hear a judge making an astonishing conclusion and handing over a shocking judgment.

    There was a case involving a state security criminal who was brought to justice and tried by the criminal court. He was convicted and sentenced, I think to death. The ruling was appealed up to the Cassation Court (Supreme Court), which found something in contradiction with the law. By coincidence, the person who interrogated with the criminal upon his apprehension was the same person who represented the Public Prosecutor's office in the pleadings! The Court of Cassation ruled that the violation had given an advantage to the prosecutor as he got privileged information from the defendant, during the interrogation process. The ruling was overturned, but I do not know what happened afterwards.

    Curiosity kills the cat!
    In a less serious incident, a customer took her car to a repair shop. The car was fixed just to be broken in a couple of days, but this time the defect had to do with another part of the car, not the one for which the customer brought its car for maintenance. Since the customer's complaint was about the brakes, the workers said they could try the car to prove that the brakes were fine. They said they drove the car with the customer and tested the car's brakes, which seemed to need replacement. When the owner came back, he was unhappy with what the workers have done and told them they should have simply refused to deal with the car. Well, his fears were well founded. The judge said to the defendant at court "I infer from the fact that you test drove the car on the brakes issue that you 'knew it was your fault' and you wanted to check on it." Judgment for the plaintiff!

    Grounds for judgment vacation?
    In my country, when the case reaches up to the Court of Cassation (the supreme court), the appellant argues that "the judge's decision and judgment are flawed by 'bad reasoning and inference' and 'incorrect conclusion')
    للمشاركة في االدروس اضغط هنا

    Contact me:

Unconfigured Ad Widget


What's Going On


There are currently 1463 users online. 9 members and 1454 guests.

Most users ever online was 2,917 at 08:09 PM on 04-07-2019.