Constitutional Lecture 31.01.19
Magill v Porter:
What is fair minded? Neither complacent/unduly sensitive
What does ‘observer’ know-assumed to have access to all facts that are capable of
being known by members of the public generally
Threshold for ‘real possibility’
Abdroikov (3 cases):
1. Attempted murder. Juror a police officer. Will be biased and side with police.
2. Police officer sitting on jury and served in same borough as officers who arrested
defendant. Assault. Known drug addict.
3. Member of jury works for CPS.
Abdroikov (3 cases go to Court of Appeal) but argue if police officers are allowed to serve
don’t see the issue, there is no bias. Makes its way to HoL (5 Law Lords) with a split decision
3:2. First case-no apparent bias (unanimous) no dispute as to evidence and no close
relationship between juror and prosecuting officers. Second case- 3:2; apparent bias, close
proximity of juror to prosecuting offices and dispute as to evidence (risk of bias). Third case-
apparent bias; full time employee of prosecutor (doesn’t look right from an institutional
point of view) Much criticised since legislation says CPS members can sit on jury.
Lawal v Northern Spirit:
Employment Appeals Tribunal; judgment have status of High Court
Legally qualified chair (full and part time) and Lay members
Can chair, having previously sat with a lay member, appear as counsel before lay
member? (from advising lay member to arguing against him)
Court argues this is apparent bias: undermines confidence in administration of
justice.
Helow v Secretary of State for the Home Dpt.:
Palestinian seeking asylum, application rejected by Lady Cosgrove who is part of Pro-
Zionist Jewish lawyers association
Lady Cosgrove frequently gets publications for being a member; controversial views.
Can we use the abuse from that organisation to find she is bias? There are some
views in that journal that show so
BUT COURT SAYS NO BIAS because she’s a judge (should be neutral and impartial);
Lady Cosgrove had not expressly associated herself with views in publication
She should be able to dispassionately tread wide variety of material without being
swayed as she’s a judge
Heavily criticised and controversial; fiction to be completely neutral and non-
arbitrary
Gillies v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions:
Man refused disability benefits and goes to a tribunal; doctor=lay member has also
worked for Dept. for Work and Pensions
No apparent bias for similar reasons as in Helow; he is a doctor so has position of
responsibility; trained and professional (neutral)
Not clear how these cases can be reconciled with Abdroikov; why is judge and doctor okay,
but not CPS?
NON-JUDICIAL CASES:
Franklin v Minister of Town and Country Planning:
Decision of moving 50,000 people to Stevenage
Magill v Porter:
What is fair minded? Neither complacent/unduly sensitive
What does ‘observer’ know-assumed to have access to all facts that are capable of
being known by members of the public generally
Threshold for ‘real possibility’
Abdroikov (3 cases):
1. Attempted murder. Juror a police officer. Will be biased and side with police.
2. Police officer sitting on jury and served in same borough as officers who arrested
defendant. Assault. Known drug addict.
3. Member of jury works for CPS.
Abdroikov (3 cases go to Court of Appeal) but argue if police officers are allowed to serve
don’t see the issue, there is no bias. Makes its way to HoL (5 Law Lords) with a split decision
3:2. First case-no apparent bias (unanimous) no dispute as to evidence and no close
relationship between juror and prosecuting officers. Second case- 3:2; apparent bias, close
proximity of juror to prosecuting offices and dispute as to evidence (risk of bias). Third case-
apparent bias; full time employee of prosecutor (doesn’t look right from an institutional
point of view) Much criticised since legislation says CPS members can sit on jury.
Lawal v Northern Spirit:
Employment Appeals Tribunal; judgment have status of High Court
Legally qualified chair (full and part time) and Lay members
Can chair, having previously sat with a lay member, appear as counsel before lay
member? (from advising lay member to arguing against him)
Court argues this is apparent bias: undermines confidence in administration of
justice.
Helow v Secretary of State for the Home Dpt.:
Palestinian seeking asylum, application rejected by Lady Cosgrove who is part of Pro-
Zionist Jewish lawyers association
Lady Cosgrove frequently gets publications for being a member; controversial views.
Can we use the abuse from that organisation to find she is bias? There are some
views in that journal that show so
BUT COURT SAYS NO BIAS because she’s a judge (should be neutral and impartial);
Lady Cosgrove had not expressly associated herself with views in publication
She should be able to dispassionately tread wide variety of material without being
swayed as she’s a judge
Heavily criticised and controversial; fiction to be completely neutral and non-
arbitrary
Gillies v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions:
Man refused disability benefits and goes to a tribunal; doctor=lay member has also
worked for Dept. for Work and Pensions
No apparent bias for similar reasons as in Helow; he is a doctor so has position of
responsibility; trained and professional (neutral)
Not clear how these cases can be reconciled with Abdroikov; why is judge and doctor okay,
but not CPS?
NON-JUDICIAL CASES:
Franklin v Minister of Town and Country Planning:
Decision of moving 50,000 people to Stevenage
