Amici Curiae Definition Legal

Under Canadian law, an amicus curiae is a lawyer and not an external entity that is required by the court to provide opinions in a manner that ensures that legal issues affecting the interests of all parties are properly addressed. If one of the parties (e.g. the defendant in criminal proceedings) is not represented (and is not eligible or refuses to apply for legal aid) and the judge fears that this party may be significantly disadvantaged and risk a miscarriage of justice, the judge may appoint a lawyer as amicus curiae. Counsel is not appointed by and does not represent the unrepresented party as such, but is responsible for ensuring that legal issues relevant to the party`s case are brought to the attention of the court. For example, in criminal proceedings, the amicus will be responsible for ensuring that the defendant`s right to a full answer and defence is preserved. Examples of situations that may require the appointment of Amicus could be a very complex or technical trial, an undemanding defendant or one with cognitive or psychiatric problems, or an unruly and disruptive defendant. [33] In some cases where an accused hired defence counsel for part of the trial but subsequently dismissed him, and if the judge determines that an amicus is needed, the former defence lawyer may be asked to remain amicus because he or she is familiar with the case. The term amicus curiae is most commonly used in connection with the Supreme Court. Supreme Court cases, especially cases involving controversial issues, often involve a series of amicus curiae briefs from prominent figures or organizations. The Amicus Curiae is walking a fine line between providing additional information and promoting the cause of one of the parties. For example, it cannot raise issues that the parties themselves do not raise, because that is the job of the parties and their lawyers. If the court allows, amici curiae may file briefs (called amicus curiae briefs or amicus briefs), plead the case, and provide evidence.

However, you are allowed to make most of the applications, file pleadings or not handle the case. The privilege granted to friends of the court to express their point of view in a case is just that: amici curiae do not have the right to appear or to make pleadings. Unless they represent the government, amici curiae must obtain permission from the court or the consent of all parties to the case before giving evidence. No court is obliged to follow or even take into account the advice of an amicus curiae, not even the one it has invited. For example, in 1969, the Missouri Supreme Court distinguished the role of the amicus curiae from the normal role of the attorney in court attendance. In this case, the court asked the lawyer who had previously represented the parties in the case to assist him in testifying and cross-examining the witnesses. The attorney also objected and argued against the city, which defended the zoning lawsuit. In requesting payment of legal fees for his services, the lawyer argued that, because of his activity, he had served as an amicus curiae at the request of the court. The Supreme Court noted that “she assisted the court in the orderly and intelligent presentation of the case, as did any lawyer who contributes to the orderly presentation of a case.

However, he did not act as an advisor to the court, but as a representative of private litigants. Promotion of their partisan interests. and is not entitled to have the fees for his admittedly valuable and competent professional services taxed as costs” (Kansas City v. Kindle, 446 S.W. 2d 807 [Mo. 1969]). The issue was revisited in the United States – Lead and Bismuth II, which concerned the imposition by the United States of duties on certain hot-rolled lead and carbon bismuth steels imported from the United Kingdom. [27] The trial panel confirmed the position in USA-Shrimp and accepted two amicus curiae pleadings filed.

[28] In the complaint, the Appellate Body relied on Article 17.9 of the Dispute Settlement Agreement and Rule 16(1) of the Working Procedures for the Review of Appeal Procedures to establish rules for the acceptance of Amicus Curiae`s pleadings. [29] An Appellate Body considered this to be the source of the legal authority to accept such pleadings. [29] In U.S. law, an amicus curiae generally refers to what is called an intervener in other jurisdictions: a person or organization that requests legal submissions to provide another relevant or additional perspective with respect to the issues being challenged. In U.S. courts, the amicus can be called the amicus letter. In other jurisdictions, such as Canada, an amicus curiae is a lawyer who is asked by the court to make legal submissions on matters that would not otherwise be properly disseminated, often because one or both parties are not represented by counsel. [Citation needed] An amicus curiae informs the court of questionable legal issues, collects or organizes information, or raises awareness of an aspect of the case that the court might otherwise overlook. The person is usually, but not necessarily, a lawyer and is generally not compensated for their expertise. An amicus curiae must not be a party to the case or a lawyer in the case, but must have knowledge or perspective that makes his or her views valuable to the court.

An amicus curiae (lit. “friend of the court”; pl. Amici Curiae) is a person or organization that is not a party to a court case, but has the right to assist a court by offering information, expertise or ideas that affect the problems of the case. Deciding whether or not to review an amicus letter is at the discretion of the court. The term is legal Latin and the origin of the term has been dated 1605-1615. The scope of amici curiae is usually found in cases where broad public interests are at stake and civil rights concerns are questioned. [1] Amici curiae who do not file briefs often present an academic point of view on the case. For example, if the law respects a history of legislation on a particular subject, a historian may choose to evaluate the claim based on his or her specialized expertise. An economist, statistician or sociologist may choose to do the same. Newspaper editorials, blogs and other opinion pieces arguably have the ability to influence Supreme Court decisions as de facto amici curiae. [14] [15] However, they are not technically considered amici curiae because they do not have to submit documents to the Court of Justice, do not have to apply for permission and have no guarantee that they will be read. In general, Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appeal governs amici curiae proceedings before federal courts.

Before the U.S. Supreme Court, court authorization (seeking permission) or mutual consent of the parties is usually required, unless the amicus letter is filed by the federal government (or one of its officials or agents) or a U.S. state. The admission of an amicus curiae to oral proceedings is considered to be `exceptional`. [20] The court may also appoint its own amicus curiae if neither party supports the lower court`s decision, which it has done at least 44 times. [21] Amicus Curiae literally translated from Latin is “friend of the court.” The plural is “amici curiae”. There are state and federal laws that govern the participation of an amicus curiae. For example, Rule 37 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States and Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appeal Procedure specify the content, timing and manner in which an amicus may participate in a trial. The U.S.

Supreme Court has special rules for amicus curiae pleadings to be filed in pending cases. Section 37 of the Supreme Court states in part that such a brief should cover “relevant issues” that are not addressed by the parties, which “may be of considerable assistance.” [16] The cover of an amicus letter must indicate which part of the letter supports or whether the letter only supports confirmation or reversal. [17] The Court also requires all non-governmental Amici to identify those who make a financial contribution to the preparation or presentation of pleadings. [18] Pleadings must be submitted in booklet form and 40 copies must be served on the court. [19] Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article on amicus curiae State rules on civil procedure and appeal regulate amici curiae in state affairs. A person called amicus curiae is not part of either party to a proceeding or acts on behalf of the court itself. Rather, it is an external party contributing to the case. n. Latin for “friend of the court”, a party or organization interested in a case that files a brief or participates in the reasoning in a case where that party or organization is not a litigant. For example, the American Civil Liberties Union often files briefs on behalf of a party who claims their constitutional rights have been violated, even if the plaintiff has his or her own lawyer.

Friends of the Earth or the Sierra Club can submit a letter of support for an environmental action in which they are not really involved. Normally, the court must allow the filing of pleadings, and arguments can only be presented with the consent of the party supporting the Amicus Curiae, and this argument arises from the time allotted to the submission of that party to the court. The role of Amicus Curiae`s briefs in the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system is controversial. The controversy stems from the governmental nature of WTO disputes. [22] Since only WTO Members have access to the system, non-Members such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are excluded and do not have the right to be heard. [23] Therefore, they can only contribute to a WTO decision through amicus curiae briefs.