No entitlement to human rights damages after ‘caste discrimination’ case collapse – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The High Court has ruled that when long-running employment tribunal hearing collapsed as the result of the judge’s recusal due to apparent bias the claimants in the action could not obtain damages for wasted costs under section 6 of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998 (specifically Article 6, the right to a fair trial) or the EU Charter.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 25th February 2015


Allegations Of Bias In Long And Complex Cases – Littleton Chambers

Posted November 18th, 2014 in appeals, bias, judiciary, news, recusal by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has handed down guidance on the approach to take to allegations of bias in long-running cases where a judge has substantial involvement in the prior stages of a case’s history.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 27th October 2014


Case Law developments on recusal – No. 5 Chambers

Posted December 12th, 2013 in judges, news, recusal by sally

‘The circumstances in which a Judge or a Tribunal Member might be requested or required to recuse themselves is considered by Gemma Roberts together with the relevant case law.’

Full story

No. 5 Chambers, 4th December 2013


Resolution Chemicals Ltd v H Lundbec A/S – WLR Daily

Posted November 28th, 2013 in appeals, bias, expert witnesses, judges, law reports, recusal by tracey

Resolution Chemicals Ltd v H Lundbec A/S: [2013] EWCA Civ 1515;   [2013] WLR (D)  453

‘The fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would not conclude that there was a real possibility that the judge would be subconsciously biased in his assessment of the evidence of an expert witness in a patent action where the witness had been the judge’s research supervisor at university.’

WLR Daily, 25th November 2013


Judge refuses to recuse himself in case where expert witness was his Oxford supervisor – Litigation Futures

Posted November 7th, 2013 in bias, expert witnesses, judges, news, patents, recusal by tracey

“A High Court judge has refused to recuse himself from a case involving an expert witness who was once his academic supervisor at Oxford University.”

Full story

Litigation Futures, 6th November 2013


CA: judge should have recused himself from hearing wasted costs application – Litigation Futures

“The Court of Appeal has taken the highly unusual step of ruling that a judge should have recused himself from hearing a wasted costs order against a party’s solicitors given the comments he made about them in his substantive judgment.”

Full story

Litigation Futures, 27th August 2013


Mengiste and another v Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray and others – WLR Daily

Posted August 19th, 2013 in appeals, bias, costs, expert witnesses, judiciary, law reports, recusal, solicitors by tracey

Mengiste and another v Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray and others:[2013] EWCA Civ 1003;   [2013] WLR (D)  337

“The judge who had heard a substantive application would almost always be the right judge to deal with consequential issues as to costs, even if he had made findings adverse to a party in the course of reaching his conclusion. However, exceptional circumstances might arise where there was apparent bias stemming from the facts of the case which meant that the judge should have recused himself from dealing with the issue of costs.”

WLR Daily, 14th August 2013


Employment tribunal hearing first claim for caste discrimination collapses – The Guardian

“An employment tribunal hearing the first claim for unfair dismissal on the grounds of caste discrimination has collapsed after information handed to the judge by police led the judge to recuse herself from the case.”

Full story

The Guardian, 14th February 2013


JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov (No 8) – WLR Daily

Posted December 5th, 2012 in bias, civil justice, contempt of court, law reports, recusal by sally

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov (No 8) [2012] EWCA Civ 1551; [2012] WLR (D) 366

“Where a judge had heard pretrial evidence on an application for committal or in litigation commencing with a freezing order in the nature of cross-examination of a principal litigant or important potential witness and had come to some conclusions about it, he was judging the matter before him, as he was required by his office to do. If he did so fairly and judicially no fair-minded and informed observer would consider that there was any possibility of apparent bias.”

WLR Daily, 28th November 2012


Government of the United States of America v Nolan (Case C-583/10) – WLR Daily

Posted October 23rd, 2012 in armed forces, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports, recusal, redundancy by sally

Government of the United States of America v Nolan (Case C-583/10); [2012] WLR (D) 280

“Since civilian employees at a military base were covered by the exemption from the provisions of Council Directive 98/59/EC provided by article 1(2)(b), the Court of Justice of the European Union did not have jurisdiction, on a reference in proceedings concerning dismissals resulting from a strategic decision concerning the closure of a military base, to give an interpretation of the provisions of that Directove, even though domestic law implemented it.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2012


Regina (Kaur) v Institute of Legal Executives Appeal Tribunal and another – WLR Daily

Regina (Kaur) v Institute of Legal Executives Appeal Tribunal and another [2011] EWCA Civ 1168; [2011] WLR (D) 298

“Judges should not sit or should face recusal or disqualification where there was a real possibility on the objective appearances of things, assessed by the fair-minded and informed observer, that the tribunal could be biased. The vice-president of the Institute of Legal Executives (‘ILEX’) ought not to have been a member of a disciplinary appeal tribunal set up by the institute to deal with breaches of its rules. Her leading role in the institute and her inevitable interest in its policy of disciplinary regulation should have disqualified her because the fair-minded and informed observer ought to have or would have concluded that there was a real possibility of bias.”

WLR Daily, 19th October 2011


Regina v I (C) and others – WLR Daily

Posted August 27th, 2009 in case management, judiciary, law reports, recusal by sally

Regina v I (C) and others; [2009] WLR (D) 286

“A judge who had conducted the case management of a long or complex case, whether or not as a preparatory hearing, had to conduct the trial in that case unless there were sufficiently compelling cause to depart from that rule.”

WLR Daily, 26th August 2009


Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.