Can a judge be held liable for damages for gross negligence when acting judicially?

As to immunity at common law, there can be no question that members of the judiciary are protected from liability for damages when acting judicially. As stated by Lord Denning, M.R., in Sirros v. Moore, [1975] 1 Q.B. 118, at p. 136: "So long as (a judge) does his work in the honest belief that it is within his jurisdiction, then he is not liable to an action. He may be mistaken in fact. He may be ignorant in law. What he does may be outside his jurisdiction - in fact or in law - but so long as he honestly believes it to be within his jurisdiction, he should not be liable. Once he honestly entertains this belief, nothing else will make him liable. He is not to be plagued with allegations of malice or ill-will or bias or anything of the kind. Actions based on such allegations have been struck out and will continue to be struck out. Nothing will make him liable except it be shown that he was not acting judicially, knowing that he had no jurisdiction to do it."