header-logo header-logo

Judicial bias and preconceptions

09 September 2016
Issue: 7713 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The President of the Supreme Court once found himself justifying the inconsistencies in an elderly man’s unconvincing evidence because his mannerisms reminded him of his recently deceased father.

Lord Neuberger recalled the experience while giving a speech on judicial ethics, at the recent Singapore Panel on Judicial Ethics and Dilemmas on the Bench. He said all human beings have preconceived ideas and notions, and the “important thing is that judges are as aware as they can be of any biases or prejudices they suffer from, and that they acknowledge and take into account those biases and prejudices when evaluating witnesses and their evidence.”

He explained that the role of the common law judge is that of umpire in a contest. The introduction of the Jackson reforms, which impose case management duties on the judge, made the judge also a manager but did not impinge on their role of umpire.

Lord Neuberger commented on the extent to which judges can ask questions and raise issues during a trial, which he described as a “thorny issue”. He said it is a “fact-sensitive and discretionary matter”—if the judge asks too many questions there is a danger they will become biased “because he or she has been thinking about the case through the prism of one party’s case”.

Issue: 7713 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll