 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Re: Judicial Accountability vs. Judicial Immunity worldwide
Posted by André Scheidtmann on March 25, 2003 at 17:50:15:
In Reply to: Judicial Accountability vs. Judicial Immunity worldwide posted by Judicial Avenger on March 25, 2003 at 14:37:59:
In Germany, a breach of law by public authorities which leads to
damage, entails state liability (section 839 para. 1 of the German Civil Code).
The possibility to get redress, however, is limited if a judge renders a
wrongful judgment: damages can only be claimed if the judge has, by delivering
the judgment, committed a criminal act (s. 839(2) of the German Civil Code),
e.g. miscarriage of justice (s. 339 of the German Criminal Code), which
requires intent on the part of the judge. The breach may also consist of, for
example, extortion of statements (s. 343 of the German Criminal Code). However,
a judge/the state cannot be sued for mere negligence/incompetence on the part
of the judge.
© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part
of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European
Law at the European University
Institute.
This file was last modified:
Monday, May 05, 2003 12:09PM