‘Bias’ covers more than an individual having direct financial or pecuniary interest in the outcome of a case, as Neil Parpworth explains
- Covers Suleman v General Optical Council, on apparent bias.
- The connection between the panel member and Specsavers only became apparent to the appellant when her counsel was preparing the grounds of appeal.
English law has long recognised that in addition to ensuring the relevant parties are heard, a fair decision-making process also entails an absence of bias on the part of the decision-maker. Thus, in one of the leading cases, Davidson v Scottish Ministers [2004] UKHL 34, Lord Hope observed: ‘The word “bias” is used as a convenient shorthand. But it would be a mistake to approach it in this context as if its only meaning were pejorative. The essence of it is captured in the Convention concept of impartiality. An interest in the outcome of a case or an indication of prejudice against a party to the case or his associates will, of course,
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7bf1005b_1)
