header-logo header-logo

In the hot seat

07 April 2011 / Robert Rhodes KC
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Features , Judicial review , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Robert Rhodes QC on avoiding the risk of judicial review when chairing a disciplinary tribunal

The growing risk of judicial review can be a constant worry to chairmen of disciplinary tribunals. There are, however, certain straightforward and simple matters which, if properly borne in mind, should minimise this risk.

Fairness

This is the key concept. If this underlines the conduct of the proceedings, the other points set out below will flow from this. Thus no member of the tribunal should be, or appear to be, biased. A financial or proprietary interest in the proceedings will automatically disqualify the member. If a member has a close connection to a party to the proceedings, he will be disqualified from sitting. Thus in R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex p Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) [1999] 1 All ER 577, [1999] 2 WLR 272, an extradition decision of the House of Lords was set aside because one of the judges was a director (albeit unpaid) of a company controlled by a party

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll