Lodwick v London Borough of Southwark: CA 18 Mar 2004

The claimant alleged bias on the part of the employment appeal tribunal chairman hearing his appeal. The chairman refused to stand down, saying that he was only one of three tribunal members with an equal vote. The chairman had four year’s previously made adverse comments about the applicant in a case in which he had appeared as a union representative.
Held: The reasons given by the tribunal were deficient. Without evidence as to what had occurred at the tribunal, it was not possible for the Court of Appeal to resolve the factual issues as to whether there had been bias. The test was whether a fair-minded and informed observer would see a real possibility of bias. The case was remitted to the EAT with a direction that the appeal to it had been on a question of law, and that it therefore had had jurisdiction. The award of costs was misconceived.

Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Latham
[2004] EWCA Civ 306, Times 09-Apr-2004, [2004] ICR 884, [2004] IRLR 554
Bailii
Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2001
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromLodwick v London Borough of Southwark EAT 7-Mar-2003
The applicant was employed by the respondent and sought leave to work for the CAB for a year, requesting a sabbatical. Leave was refused. He applied to the employment tribunal, but objected that the chairman had, in a previous case, indicated his . .
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
CitedRegina v Inner West London Coroner Ex Parte Dallaglio, and Ex Parte Lockwood Croft CA 16-Jun-1994
A coroner’s comment that the deceased’s relative was ‘unhinged’ displayed a bias which was irreparable. ‘The description ‘apparent bias’ traditionally given to this head of bias is not entirely apt, for if despite the appearance of bias the court is . .
CitedClenae Pty Ltd and Others v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd 9-Apr-1999
(Supreme Court of Victoria) The court considered the issue of bias in a judge where he held shares in a company in the trial before him.
Held: The outcome of the litigation could not have realistically affected his judgment. He held a small . .
CitedLocabail (UK) Ltd, Regina v Bayfield Properties Ltd CA 17-Nov-1999
Adverse Comments by Judge Need not be Show of Bias
In five cases, leave to appeal was sought on the basis that a party had been refused disqualification of judges on grounds of bias. The court considered the circumstances under which a fear of bias in a court may prove to be well founded: ‘The mere . .
CitedDavidson v John Calder (Publishers) Ltd and Another 1985
. .
CitedGee v Shell UK Ltd CA 24-Oct-2002
The claimant sought an award for unfair dismissal. A similar case had been decided against another worker, and the respondent warned that it would want its costs. The tribunal gave her a warning that she was at risk of a costs order. She withdrew . .
CitedE T Marler Limited v Robertson NIRC 1974
A frivolous claim is one that has no substance in it and is bound to fail or on the face of it is so manifestly misconceived that it has no prospect of success: ‘If the employee knows that there is no substance in his claim and that it is bound to . .

Cited by:
Appealed toLodwick v London Borough of Southwark EAT 7-Mar-2003
The applicant was employed by the respondent and sought leave to work for the CAB for a year, requesting a sabbatical. Leave was refused. He applied to the employment tribunal, but objected that the chairman had, in a previous case, indicated his . .
CitedAnsar v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others CA 9-Oct-2006
The claimant challenged a decision of the chairman of the Employment tribunal not to recuse himself on a later hearing after the claimant had previously made allegations of bias and improper conduct against him. . .
CitedYerrakalva v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council and Another EAT 8-Dec-2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs
Discrimination claim withdrawn – Judge awards Rs 100% of their costs, not on the basis that the claim had been misconceived or unreasonably pursued from the start but . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.194822