Ibn Majah

Benefits and Issues:
➊ The mentioned narration has been declared weak in chain (sanadan da'if) by our esteemed researcher, whereas other scholars have declared it authentic. Therefore, despite the chain of this narration being weak, it is still actionable and a valid proof.
For further details, see: (Al-Mawsu‘ah al-Hadithiyyah Musnad Ahmad: 2/68, 92, 365, and Al-Irwa’ by Al-Albani, no. 2600)
Accordingly, it is the duty of the Muslim leader (khalifah) to appoint judges (qadis) in different regions and cities of the country.

➋ For any position, the person who is appointed should be someone who possesses the capability to fulfill the duties related to that position.

➌ If a person feels that he does not have the ability to fulfill the duties that are being assigned to him, then he has the right to refuse to accept the position.

➍ Stating one’s weakness or difficulties before one’s elder or leader is not considered disobedience.

➎ For someone who is entrusted with a new responsibility, along with providing appropriate guidance, making supplication (du‘a) for him is also very beneficial for him.

Benefits and Issues:
Benefit: This narration is weak in its chain of transmission.
However, this incident, with some brevity, is narrated in Sunan Ibn Majah with a sound chain of transmission.
The additional part in the present narration is this:
That the judgment should be made after hearing both parties.
This point is correct in itself and is established from several other narrations.
However, if one party, upon being summoned, does not appear,
and has no valid excuse, and it becomes clear that he is deliberately avoiding facing the judge and the court,
then the judge, fulfilling the requirements of justice, may pronounce the judgment in his absence.
And Allah knows best.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه أبوداود، القضاء، باب كيف القضاء، حديث:3582، والترمذي، الأحكام، حديث:1331، وأحمد:1 /143، 150، وابن حبان (الموارد)، حديث:1539، وحديث ابن عباس: أخرجه الحاكم:4 /93 وصححه ووافقه الذهبي وهو حديث حسن.»©Explanation:
➊ The aforementioned narration has been declared weak in its chain by our esteemed researcher, whereas other scholars have graded it as authentic (sahih) and good (hasan). Furthermore, Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah has presented the hadith of Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhuma at the end of the narration as corroborative evidence; our esteemed researcher has graded this as hasan.
Therefore, from the detailed discussion of the scholars, it is evident that this narration is actionable and a valid proof.
And Allah knows best.
For further details, see: (Irwa’ al-Ghalil: 8/226, 228; and al-Mawsu‘ah al-Hadithiyyah, Musnad al-Imam Ahmad: 2/103, 104)

➋ This hadith establishes that a judge should issue a verdict after hearing the arguments of both parties; if he acts contrary to this, it will be unlawful (haram).

➌ It is obligatory to issue a verdict after hearing the statements and arguments of both parties; issuing a verdict after hearing only one party’s arguments is invalid and has no consideration.

➍ As for the question: if the second party remains silent, says nothing before the court—neither admitting nor denying—or if the second party, despite being summoned by the court, does not appear to give a statement, or resorts to procrastination, then can a unilateral decree be issued against such a party or not? The most correct view appears to be that in such a case, the court is authorized to issue a unilateral verdict.
And Allah knows best.