Kelly Martin wrote:
On 10/6/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Appelate courts also do not permit new evidence to be brought forth. They judge on points of law rather than facts. It would be up to the lower ranking tribunal to sort through the mass of irrelevant material that is often raised.
I don't guarantee that the ArbCom would elect to refuse to consider new evidence on appeal. However, just having the case marshalled for review through the process of the preceding magisterial process will immensely help the ArbCom in its determinations.
The other appeal to a tiered system is that it will scale far better than most of the other proposals I've seen. Any system which has ArbCom as a court of original jurisdiction is going to have scaling problems in the long term, IMO.
Absolutely. Having a single arbitrator rule on a new appeal would probably lead to a quicker result. This could be appealed to a panel, but the panel members should not accept to hear every case that comes before them. If they make a habit of accepting everything, then everything will be appealed.. By taking a stricter approach to this and what they will accept as evidence their task can be much easier.
Ec