header-logo header-logo

05 January 2018 / Ben Amunwa
Issue: 7775 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Standing aside

nlj_7775_amunwa_0

Post-Vanderbilt, Ben Amunwa examines where the lines are when it comes to recusal

  • When recusal is deemed appropriate
  • Consequences of failing to make an application for recusal

Should judges recuse themselves if they practise in the same chambers as a barrister in the case? No, according to the Court of Appeal in Vanderbilt v Azumi and others [2017] EWCA Civ 2133. However, such cases are fact-sensitive. Certain factors can make recusal appropriate.

Background

Vanderbilt arose from a trademark dispute between a pet food vendor and a Japanese restaurant chain over the use of the name 'Zuma'.

During proceedings in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC), Ms Vanderbilt, who did not have legal representation and was against both a silk and a junior instructed by solicitors, asked Recorder Campbell QC to recuse himself from deciding her summary judgment application on the grounds that he was a practising barrister in the same chambers as the lead barrister representing the respondents' Japanese restaurant chain. The judge fully disclosed this connection at the outset of the

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll