“HAP. I] THE TENURE OF JUDICIAL OFFICES 1347
Nor does it seem likely that apart from the existence of the
local Act removal after suspension will in any case be adopted;
and it must be admitted that it would be very doubtful
whether it could possibly be held that the legal right existed,
though a discussion of a right which is not likely ever to be
exercised cannot altogether be satisfactory.
In the exercise of his functions a Colonial judicial officer
is exempt from suit on the same principles as apply to an
Imperial judge.!

ment of Victoria, pp. 318, 319. The New Zealand Act of 1908, No. 89,
8. 8 and 9, allow the King on address to remove and the Governor in
Council to suspend on address or provisionally if Parliament is not sitting
until the end of the next session. The Nova Scotia Act of 1848, c. 21,
provided for removal on an address with an appeal to the Privy Council,
a curious mixture. Ci. Canada Acts, 7 Vict. c. 15; 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 4.
¢ Cf. Haggard v. Pelicier Fréres, [1892] A. C. 61; Anderson v. Gorrie,
1895] 1 Q. B. 668, which establishes the immunity of a judge even if
ne act perversely and maliciously if he acts within his jurisdiction :
McLennan v. Hubert, 22 L. C. J. 294: Scott v. Stansfield, 3 Ex. 220.