Latest news with #CourtOfCassation
LBCI
34 minutes ago
- Politics
- LBCI
Supreme Judicial Council approves judicial appointments draft and refers It to Justice Minister for issuance
The media office of Lebanon's Supreme Judicial Council issued a statement on Wednesday announcing that the council has finalized and approved its draft of judicial appointments and transfers, following two months of intensive deliberations. The statement noted that this decision follows up on the council's April 15, 2025 announcement, in which it called on judges to support the council's new direction by upholding judicial integrity and reviving judicial work. At that time, the council had also approved objective criteria for judicial appointments and transfers, and issued partial appointments for heads of chambers at the Court of Cassation and chief judges in the provinces. After almost daily meetings that began on June 2, the council completed a comprehensive judicial reshuffle affecting 524 judges. The final draft, approved in a session held on July 30, 2025, was the result of unanimous agreement among council members. The council emphasized that the process remained free of external interference and was based entirely on objective standards. The council stated it will closely monitor the performance of the newly assigned judges over a short period of no more than six months. Judges who fail to meet their duties and uphold their judicial oath will face consequences accordingly. The draft decree has been officially submitted to the Minister of Justice, in line with the legal process, which requires that relevant authorities only receive the document once it has been completed and signed by the council. The new appointments are set to take effect at the beginning of the upcoming judicial year on September 16, 2025. The Supreme Judicial Council expressed hope that this reform will pave the way for a more effective and productive judiciary, aimed at holding violators accountable, delivering justice, and restoring public trust in the judicial system. It reiterated that judges' performance will remain under review and that appropriate action will be taken when necessary.
Khaleej Times
a day ago
- Khaleej Times
UAE: Man gets Dh300,000 in criminal case, appeal for more rejected by top court
The UAE's Court of Cassation has rejected an appeal filed by a man seeking a higher compensation amount after already being awarded damages in a case linked to a previous criminal conviction. The case began when the first respondent was found guilty in a criminal case by the Abu Dhabi Criminal Court. As part of the verdict, the court ordered the respondent to pay the victim (now the appellant) Dh51,000 as interim compensation. Later, the victim filed a civil lawsuit requesting further compensation for the material and moral damages he suffered as a result of the harmful act committed by the first respondent. The civil court reviewed the case and awarded him a total of Dh300,000. The court's verdict does not mention the exact nature of the crime committed and only cites Criminal Case No. 111/2024. It also refrains from specifying the harm caused to the victim, referring only generally to material and moral damages. The appellant then tried to challenge this ruling, hoping for a higher amount. However, the Court of Cassation upheld the original judgment, stating that the Dh300,000 award was fair and based on solid evidence. The court also noted that criminal judgments are final in terms of proving the facts and cannot be re-examined in civil court. During the final ruling on July 23, the Court of Cassation found that the appellant's objections were merely disputes about how the trial court evaluated the evidence, which is not a valid ground for cassation. Since the appeal lacked valid legal grounds, the court dismissed the case, ordered the appellant to pay court fees and expenses, and confiscated the appeal insurance. The ruling simply affirms that the trial court evaluated the damage and found the compensation of Dh300,000 to be appropriate and justified, based on the documents and legal reasoning.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
New legal action launched against Syria's Assad after French court ruling
New legal proceedings have been set in motion against Syria's former president Bashar al-Assad, after France's top court cleared the way for prosecution now that he no longer holds office. French prosecutors have asked magistrates to issue a new arrest warrant for Syria's former president Bashar al-Assad over a deadly 2013 chemical attack, following the annulment of a previous warrant due to presidential immunity. The move comes after France's top court, the Court of Cassation, last Friday quashed a 2023 warrant targeting Assad while he was still in power. The court ruled that heads of state are protected by personal immunity – even in cases involving alleged war crimes or crimes against humanity. However, the court's president, Christophe Soulard, said that since Assad was toppled by Islamist-led fighters in December 2024, fresh arrest warrants may now be issued, and the investigation can proceed. France's highest court to rule on arrest warrant for ex-Syrian president Assad French authorities have been investigating the sarin gas attacks on Adra and Douma, near Damascus, which took place on 4 to 5 August 2013. More than 1,000 people were killed, according to US intelligence. Assad is accused of complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role in the command structure behind the attack. On Friday, the National Anti-Terror Prosecutor's Office confirmed it had requested 'the issuing and international dissemination' of a new warrant against Assad. Assad and his family fled to Russia following his ouster, according to Russian officials. Setback for accountability The Court of Cassation's ruling on Friday has drawn criticism from human rights advocates who had hoped the court would set a precedent by lifting immunity in the face of grave international crimes. 'This ruling represents a setback for the global fight against impunity for the most serious crimes under international law,' said Mazen Darwish, head of the Syrian Centre for Media and Freedom of Expression, which is a civil party in the case. Still, the court did uphold indictments in related cases under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows French courts to prosecute serious international crimes committed abroad. In particular, the court backed legal action against former Syrian central bank governor Adib Mayaleh, accused of funding the Assad regime during the conflict. Mayaleh, a naturalised French citizen, is charged with complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Darwish welcomed this element of the ruling as a 'great victory,' stating it reinforces that no foreign official can hide behind immunity in cases of international crimes. France's top court annuls arrest warrant against Syria's Assad Broader legal efforts The French inquiry into the 2013 attack is based on testimonies from survivors, defectors, and extensive photographic and video evidence. Arrest warrants have previously been issued for Assad, his brother Maher – commander of an elite military unit – and two generals. In January, French magistrates issued a separate arrest warrant against Assad over a 2017 bombing in Deraa that killed a French-Syrian civilian. Syria's civil war, triggered by a brutal crackdown on anti-Assad protests in 2011, has left over half a million people dead and displaced millions. Assad's fall marked the end of his family's five-decade rule.
Khaleej Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Khaleej Times
UAE: Employee wins Dh1.33 million salary-repayment case against employer
The Court of Cassation in Abu Dhabi has partially overturned a previous labour court ruling that required a female employee to return Dh1.33 million in salaries paid during a disputed 18-month absence. The employee (the claimant), who had been working with the defendant company since February 2, 2014, under an open-ended contract with a basic monthly salary of Dh35,937 and a total package of Dh95,630, filed a labour claim after she was terminated on October 23, 2024, alleging wrongful dismissal. Her original claims included, unpaid wages amounting to Dh573,785, Compensation for arbitrary dismissal of Dh286,892, accrued leave amounting to Dh191,261, notice period pay of Dh95,630, gratuity of Dh324,330, moral and material damages of Dh500,000 and legal interest (12%) from the date of claim until full payment. The company filed a counterclaim, demanding that the employee return Dh1,338,833 allegedly received as salary during the 18-month period when she was purportedly absent without justification. Initial ruling by lower courts The Court of First Instance, in its ruling on March 10, 2025, granted the employee only a portion of her original claim, Dh103,665 (comprising leave and notice pay) and upheld the company's counterclaim, ordering the employee to return salary amounting to Dh1.33 million. The employee made and appeal of the case. However, the Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision on April 29, 2025. This prompted the employee to file a final appeal to the Court of Cassation. Court of Cassation's findings The Court of Cassation found serious errors in how the lower courts conducted the hearing and the ruling. The top court said that the lower courts failed to evaluate key evidence, including an official certificate from the Department of Health proving the employee had accompanied a patient abroad under a government-sponsored medical leave. The top court also said that the the lower courts failed to recognise the absence of any formal investigation by the employer regarding her alleged unauthorised absence. The lower courts also did not address the fact that the employer continued to pay salaries throughout the 18-month period without objection, which the Apex Court interpreted as implicit approval of her leave. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal failed to consider the employee's good faith, as she had communicated her leave formally and provided documentation before she went on leave. The final ruling The court said that employees who receive salaries in 'good faith' under a company's own internal automatic payroll systems should not be penalised for administrative lapses if they had no role in causing the error. In its ruling on June 18, the court stated: 'The employer's claim was unsupported by evidence and lacked compliance with required legal procedures. The employee cannot be held accountable for an administrative failure she had no control over, especially after submitting valid documents and acting in good faith.' As a result, the court partially overturned the lower ruling, rejecting the company's demand for salary repayment (Dh1.33 million), and ordered the case to be closed in favour of the employee. The top court upheld the remaining parts of the lower court's ruling, including payment of Dh33,536 for unused leave and Dh70,129 as notice period pay. In total, Dh103,665 was awarded to her from the original judgement. The Court of Cassation ordered the employer to pay court fees, including Dh1,000 in attorney fees, to the employee. The employee will also be refunded the appeal deposit.
LBCI
5 days ago
- Politics
- LBCI
France's top court rules arrest warrant for ex-Syrian leader Assad is invalid
France's highest court ruled on Friday that an arrest warrant for former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad was invalid as it was issued when he was still in office, but said a new warrant can now be issued as he is no longer a sitting head of state. French investigating magistrates had issued the warrant in November 2023 following a French investigation into chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian city of Douma and Eastern Ghouta district in August 2013 that killed more than 1,000 people. The Court of Cassation's decision overturns one made by the Paris Court of Appeal, which had ruled last year that the warrant was valid. Prosecutors, who would need to ask police to carry out the warrant, had challenged its validity. "International custom does not allow any exception to the personal immunity of a foreign head of state during the entire duration of their term in office, even when the alleged acts constitute genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity," the Court of Cassation said in a statement. Reuters
