header-logo header-logo

21 February 2008 / Craig Barlow , Jason M Hadden
Issue: 7309 / Categories: Features , Media , Profession
printer mail-detail

The El Farargy Postscript

Craig Barlow and Jason M Hadden consider judicial bias and the flying carpet

The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in El Farargy v El Farargy [2007] EWCA Civ 1149, [2007] All ER (D) 248 (Nov) was always going to make the national press, especially as the court held that—as a matter of law—an experienced Family Division High Court judge (Mr Justice Singer) should be recused from adjudicating upon the division of assets in a big money divorce case because of remarks he had made during a number of interlocutory applications in the same proceedings.

 

COLOURFUL VIEWS

The newspapers did not spare Singer J’s blushes and reported in lurid detail the remarks he had made about the Egyptian and Muslim husband. Contextually viewed, the judge’s remarks, while sometimes colourfully expressed, were—some might feel— justified. Singer J found himself squarely confronted by an allegedly rich husband who had—not merely on Singer J’s findings, but on the previous judge’s findings—consistently and flagrantly defied the court’s orders to the potential

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll