header-logo header-logo

12 November 2021 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7956 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

The right to hear & be heard

63561
Neil Parpworth examines a case of unfairness in the magistrates’ court
  • In Paling v Ipswich Magistrates Court and another [2021] EWHC 2739 (Admin), a 76-year-old man’s application for judicial review succeeded following a hearing in which the opposing side’s solicitor spoke so softly that the claimant could not hear what was being said.

In Kanda v Government of the Federation of Malaya [1962] AC 322, Lord Denning noted, among other things, that the ‘rule against bias’ and the ‘right to be heard’ amounted to the ‘essential characteristics of what is often called natural justice’. With regard to the latter, he further observed: ‘If the right to be heard is to be a real right which is worth anything, it must carry with it a right in the accused man to know the case which is made against him. He must know what evidence has been given and what statements have been made affecting him; and then he must be given a fair opportunity to correct or contradict them’

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