View a Hearing

Supreme Court

Docket: SC-53
Status: Ruled on by a Court

saintpaulbb

Attorney: Not Assigned

req.

Supreme Court

Attorney: Not Assigned

Overview
  • Type of Hearing: Request
  • Submitted: 1 month ago (06/Jun/2026 05:33:42 PM UTC)
  • Hearing Location:
  • Hearing Verdict:
  • Date Scheduled:
  • Time Scheduled:
Information
Greetings Members of the Supreme Court,
I am here today to request an interpretation based on section 5 of the policy set out by the Department of Treasury revolving around Pay Penalties. Currently as it is listed, pay penalties are only issued for failure to respond to activity requests and failure to complete tasks. Being that this is a penalty for negative action, is a District Judge or Justice authorized to issue a pay penalty as punishments for trials? According to the Secretary of Treasury, this is not something that is currently in the policy or SLR, but I feel that it could be used as a punishment depending on the severity and outcome of various trials per the Proseuction Act 2025 Part 3 S1 and Part 8 S3.
Court Opinion

Written by dreckly on 25/Jun/2026 09:54:00 AM UTC

Following a period of deliberation, the Supreme Court has decided the following:

It is our strongly held belief that the use of financial penalties, against a member's earned coin balance per the records held by the Department of the Treasury, are an acceptable punishment, which can be issued instead of, or alongside existing punishment tools.

The Supreme Court feels that there needs to be a set of limitations for this, but feels that the determination of these is outside the purview of this interpretation and thus, would seek to work alongside our colleagues from the legislature in order to create a bill that could be properly debated and put to a democratic vote.