This international commercial dispute gave rise to allegations of ‘unconscious bias’ on the part of a Judge of the Cayman Islands Grand Court. The resulting decision highlights that the perception of judicial independence is crucial.
Allegations of bias against Judges are treated with healthy scepticism. But litigators should be alert to complications that can arise when Judges have links to the lawyers in a case. In a recent commercial dispute, the Court of Appeal discussed the right approach to secure fairness and justice.
Did you know that the Immigration Tribunal can decide on disciplinary charges against rogue legal advisors? (Me neither). But a recent case sheds light on the Tribunal’s powers to disagree with the regulator and decide the matter for itself.
This Judges decisions were so bad that nobody really knows what he is talking about, or if he bothered to read the law or the papers. Upsetting when you think that in some cases, people’s lives depend on the outcome.
Trial lawyers should note the Privy Council’s recent guidance on when Judges can disbelieve witnesses on the basis of facts not put to the witness in cross-examination.
A powerful legal weapon, the Wasted Costs Order, cannot be used against Home Office employees if they behave improperly in the Immigration Tribunal, limiting the ways in which the government and its employees can be held accountable for their conduct in Tribunal proceedings.