Examples of using Each judge in English and their translations into Hebrew
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Programming
Each judge wants you to do well.
I have the schedules and addresses of each judge.
Each judge is required to score independently.
Neuer provided background on the UN fact finding mission andthe agenda of each judge on the UN investigating board.
Each judge sat on a throne of a great hall.
However, the publication that we are dealing with relates to administrative aspects-how many cases remain open on the desk of each judge and so forth.
Each judge provides his own subjective judgment.
There are, as we have said, parties other than the judge himself who decide how many andwhich cases will be heard by each judge at every stage.
Each judge gives a mark from 0 to 10.
In other words, the court does not have a structuredformula to assess the child's best interest, and each judge makes this assessment at his or her own discretion.
Each judge will be given time to evaluate all the acts independently.
I sat at my clerk's post while two intelligence agents dressed in button-down shirts and khaki pants approached the bench with three binders,one for each judge.
But each judge booted little old me out of their chambers within five minutes.
Should information concerning the number ofopen cases being deliberated in the court before each judge, the time taken to deal with them, and the name of the judge hearing each case be disclosed?
Each judge can only press the Golden Buzzer once each season.
Another possible conceivable solution is to develop software thatallows for assessment of the cases being handled by each judge in all their aspects, producing as accurate a data interface as possible.
Generally, each judge has a standard civil ceremony that he or she uses.
This intermediate situation will allow the system, as a system- including the courts administration and the presidents of the district courts and their deputies-as well as each judge, to internalize the change and to plan the administrative aspect accordingly.
A judge, each judge, is a lone knight in the fields of the law and justice.
One way or another, it is clear that publication of the information requested by therespondents will lead to increased preoccupation of each judge with justifying and defending himself in relation to the administrative aspect of the judicial task, at the expense of the substantive aspect.
Therefore, each judge could boost each performance by 8% instead of the original 10.
Instead of the cooperation that exists between the parties administering the legal system- chief among them the presidents of the courts and the courts administration-with a view to improving the performance of each judge, tension will be created between the individual judge and his superiors and other elements in the system.
On a table before each judge were books which recorded people's deeds from their lives on Earth.
This disagreement is now confined, according to the positions of the parties in the case, to the question of whether, in addition to the information that the appellant is prepared to hand over,concerning the number of open cases before each judge in the Supreme Court and in the district courts, and the time that has elapsed since each case was opened, the names of the judges will also be specified.
Each judge has 10 votes and four votes must be for restaurants outside of the region where he or she lives.
Therefore, presentation of the details of the number of cases assigned to each judge would provide a misleading representation, attesting to nothing, save the numerical assignment of anonymous cases to a judicial functionary.
The court held:‘ The aim is that the same court, the same judge shall deal with all the disputes so that he/she can end the disputes within the same family from a perspective over all the disputes, and not a split between judges, segment by segment, so that each judge sees only his/her own part, and is not able to bring the whole conflict to an end, so that there will not be mistakes arising from conflicting decisions.'.
These determine notonly which cases will be heard by each judge, but also the dates of the hearings and their order, and sometimes even the identity of the judge who will write up the judgment.
After the last performance each judge cast its votes by giving 8, 10 and 12 points to the three remaining contestants; 8 points to their third favourite and 12 points to their favourite.
Particularly worrying in my view is the concern that the special emphasis on the efficiency of the judiciary andpublishing the open cases together with the name of each judge individually, are liable to“breathe down the necks” of the judges and cause them to speed up the hearings and the rendering of judgment excessively, at the expense of quality.