نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار، گروه حقوق کیفری و جرمشناسی، پژوهشکده حقوقی شهر دانش، تهران، ایران.
2 استادیار، گروه حقوق کیفری و جرمشناسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
3 دانشآموختۀ دکترای حقوق کیفری و جرمشناسی، دانشکده حقوق، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Judicial immunity has been recognized in many legal systems as a safeguard to ensure judicial independence and impartial adjudication. However, in certain circumstances, judicial decisions may result in material or moral harm to litigants, thereby conflicting with the principle of fair trial. This article examines the legal process and judicial practice governing claims for damages arising from judges’ fault and negligence before the High Disciplinary Court for Judges, with a particular focus on selected cases involving public funds. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology based on documentary research, the study demonstrates that, notwithstanding the establishment of manifest fault in some cases, the High Disciplinary Court often reclassifies such conduct as “negligence” and consequently obliges the Public Fund to bear compensation. Moreover, the absence of the Ministry of Justice in the adjudicatory process increases the risk of conflicts of interest, while inadequate judicial awareness may amount to legal “fault”. The findings underscore the necessity of a more precise judicial distinction between fault and negligence, reforms in adjudicatory procedures, and the enhancement of judicial competence
کلیدواژهها English
