adamson_swanseEAT2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity
The Appellant alleged bias on the part of an Employment Judge and contended that he erred in rejecting his application to recuse himself.
The outcome of the appeal raised two contested issues of fact: whether information regarding the past connection between the Employment Judge and a witness had been given before or after the parties agreed in writing that the hearing could continue with the ET as then constituted (the ‘agreement’) and whether the Employment Judge had private conversations with the Respondent’s counsel.
Having heard evidence from the Appellant and counsel and solicitor for the Respondent and considering all the relevant material including the observations of the Employment Judge and the members of the ET, the EAT were satisfied that the Employment Judge disclosed his past connection with the witness before the waiver agreement was entered into and that no private conversations took place between the Employment Judge and the Respondent’s counsel.
Whilst the past connection with a witness gave the appearance of bias the right to object was effectively waived by the Appellant entering into the agreement. The relevant steps outlined in Jones v Das Legal Expenses Insurance Co Ltd [2004] IRLR 218 were complied with. The appeal was dismissed.
Judges:
Slade J
Citations:
[2010] UKEAT 0486 – 09 – 2302
Links:
Employment
Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.401681
