Javascript must be enabled to continue!
THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF RECUSAL OF A JUDGE AT COMMON LAW: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
View through CrossRef
The common-law principle that no one should be a judge in his or her own cause is the basis upon which the rule against bias or apprehension of bias was founded. In constitutional parlance, this translates into the requirement that a judge or anyone under a duty to decide anything must be impartial, which is, in turn, the foundation for the recusal of a judge in adjudication. This cardinal principle of adjudication has produced an abundant case law indicating the circumstances in which a judge should, or ought to, recuse him- or herself on the ground of bias or reasonable apprehension of bias in common-law jurisdictions. This article focuses on the fundamental principles guiding the notion of recusal in the common-law courts. There is, first, a presumption of judicial impartiality, which is the preliminary but important hurdle an applicant for recusal of a judge must overcome. The inquiry proceeds no further if this presumption is not successfully rebutted early in the proceeding. The second hurdle is the test for recusal that the facts put forward in support of the allegation of bias or apparent bias must meet. This test is a two-dimensional reasonable standard test of a reasonably informed observer who would reasonably entertain an apprehension that the judge would (not might) be biased towards one party in the case. This test enables a court to determine whether the allegation of lack of judicial impartiality in any given case could lead to the recusal of the judge. The discussion that ensues is based on decided cases selected from specific Commonwealth jurisdictions where such matters have recently been dealt with. Indeed, these cases show that recusal of a judge in adjudication is, in practical terms, the application of the common-law principle of natural justice that a person cannot be a judge in his or her own cause. It is also a clear manifestation of the age-old adage that justice must not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.
Title: THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF RECUSAL OF A JUDGE AT COMMON LAW: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
Description:
The common-law principle that no one should be a judge in his or her own cause is the basis upon which the rule against bias or apprehension of bias was founded.
In constitutional parlance, this translates into the requirement that a judge or anyone under a duty to decide anything must be impartial, which is, in turn, the foundation for the recusal of a judge in adjudication.
This cardinal principle of adjudication has produced an abundant case law indicating the circumstances in which a judge should, or ought to, recuse him- or herself on the ground of bias or reasonable apprehension of bias in common-law jurisdictions.
This article focuses on the fundamental principles guiding the notion of recusal in the common-law courts.
There is, first, a presumption of judicial impartiality, which is the preliminary but important hurdle an applicant for recusal of a judge must overcome.
The inquiry proceeds no further if this presumption is not successfully rebutted early in the proceeding.
The second hurdle is the test for recusal that the facts put forward in support of the allegation of bias or apparent bias must meet.
This test is a two-dimensional reasonable standard test of a reasonably informed observer who would reasonably entertain an apprehension that the judge would (not might) be biased towards one party in the case.
This test enables a court to determine whether the allegation of lack of judicial impartiality in any given case could lead to the recusal of the judge.
The discussion that ensues is based on decided cases selected from specific Commonwealth jurisdictions where such matters have recently been dealt with.
Indeed, these cases show that recusal of a judge in adjudication is, in practical terms, the application of the common-law principle of natural justice that a person cannot be a judge in his or her own cause.
It is also a clear manifestation of the age-old adage that justice must not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.
Related Results
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere is a monograph that argues for a fundamental reorientation of constitutional law around the realities of biospheric interdep...
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
The study deal with selected problems of international law at the time of change of the 20th and 21st centuries. Such a milestone gives an opportunity to review the achieved state ...
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Photo ID 123697425 © Alexandersikov | Dreamstime.com
Abstract
Originalism is an increasingly prevalent method for interpreting provisions of the US Constitution. It requires strict...
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
ABSTRACT
This dissertation examines Paul’s view of the law in Romans, interacting with modern exegetical traditions addressing the Old, New, and Radical New Perspectives, aiming to...
Frequency of Common Chromosomal Abnormalities in Patients with Idiopathic Acquired Aplastic Anemia
Frequency of Common Chromosomal Abnormalities in Patients with Idiopathic Acquired Aplastic Anemia
Objective: To determine the frequency of common chromosomal aberrations in local population idiopathic determine the frequency of common chromosomal aberrations in local population...
Atypical business law provisions
Atypical business law provisions
The article is devoted to the vision of atypical business law provisions. It was found that the state of scientific opinion regarding atypical business law provisions is irrelevant...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Abstract
This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
International Construction Law
International Construction Law
International law is a body of legally binding norms that regulate relations between the subjects of the international legal system and structure the functioning of the internation...

