Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses an application for a particular judge to recuse himself from ongoing proceedings despite being named as a defendant in related new litigation. The judge determined that the applications for his recusal, based on allegations of bias and infringement of EU law rights, were unfounded. The court emphasized that the issuing of new proceedings did not provide a reasonable basis for apprehension that the judge would not conduct a fair and impartial hearing. The decision to continue presiding over the case was made in light of the need to discourage potential attempts by litigants to influence the selection of judges or to delay proceedings through tactical litigation.
recusal application, impartial tribunal, EU law rights, litigation, bias, objective bias, collateral attack, judgment mortgages, well-charging proceedings, Isaac Wunder order, abuse of process, reasonable apprehension, judiciary, forum shopping, vexatious litigation, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Treaty on European Union, Constitution of Ireland, Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now