Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The article focuses on the judge's liability vilotaion of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. State of- ficials' wrongful acts result in liability of a state regardless of the fault of those officials are determined as axiomatic for the theory of law. The state agencies, where the officials are employed, are entitled to file regress suits in accordance with the procedure provided by law. In such a case, can- cellation or annulment of the wrongful act that causes damages, should not be regarded as a special precondition for the liability of the state official liable for committing such an act. The precondition of the liability of the official should be his or her fault. It is essential that the liability of a judge for issuing wrongful judicial acts, regarding his or her status, has its own peculiarities. First, according to international standards, liability of a judge for delivering an illegal judgment, that had causes financial damage and interfereance with personal rights and freedoms, is predetermined by his or her procedural independence and immunity. Secondly, compensation for losses incurred by the state as a result of a wrongful decision or conduct of a judge in the performance of his / her duties is established. In addition to this, the state has the right to bring regress suits against a judge who has caused such damages to individuals or legalentities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Овчаренко et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: