Author adminPosted on Categories Judiciary 2 Comments on When is a Judge disqualified for bias?
A decision-maker being impartial is one of the core requirements of natural justice.
In the 19th century, Lord Campbell in Dimes [1852] EngR 789 said that “no man is to be a judge in his own cause”.
As a majority of the High Court noted in Ebner v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63:
“Fundamental to the common law system of adversarial trial is that it is conducted by an independent and impartial tribunal. Perhaps the deepest historical roots of this principle can be traced to Magna Carta (with its declaration that right and justice shall not be sold)”.
Author adminPosted on Categories Judiciary 2 Comments on Amy Coney Barrett confirmed to the US Supreme Court
Black-letter lawyer and eminent judge Amy Coney Barrett has been appointed as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Continue reading “Amy Coney Barrett confirmed to the US Supreme Court”
Author adminPosted on Categories civil litigation, Judiciary 2 Comments on Judge McGill SC goes out in a blaze of glory in appeal decision Judge John McGill SC has been a stalwart of the District Court for over 20 years. His final judgment, an appeal against a decision of Magistrate Suzette Coates, has made him leave the bench with a bang and not a whimper.
Those who are familiar with civil litigation in the Magistrates Court know that it is an unfortunate reality that occasionally litigants will receive “rough justice”. This is often due to the lack of knowledge of civil litigation and/or the flippant attitudes of some Magistrates. This observation in no way is intended to criticise the vast majority of Queensland Magistrates, who are conscientious and serve their state well. Continue reading “Judge McGill SC goes out in a blaze of glory in appeal decision”
Author adminPosted on Categories Criminal law, Judiciary, Legal profession, Professional discipline Leave a comment on Former Magistrate Bill Randall struck off for child sex abuse William ‘Uncle Bill’ Randall has been struck off as a lawyer following his convictions for numerous child sex offences.
William John Randall was admitted as a solicitor of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 9 June 1981. He never practised as a solicitor, and never held a practising certificate. He was however appointed a Magistrate in 1985 and served for a long time in the small claims tribunal until his retirement in 2016.
On 21 November 2017 he was convicted by a jury of a range of serious sexual offences committed against a child. The child was just five when the abuse started in 1990 at Randall’s home at Wynnum, on Brisbane’s bayside. It continued for almost 12 years, and the victim was 30 before he finally gathered the courage to tell police. Randall was initially sentenced to 9 years imprisonment but on appeal this was increased to 11 years imprisonment. He continued to deny his offending throughout and never showed any remorse. Continue reading “Former Magistrate Bill Randall struck off for child sex abuse”
Author adminPosted on Categories Criminal law, Judiciary Leave a comment on Chief Justice of Queensland speaks out for judicial independence
Catherine Holmes, the Chief Justice of Queensland has a piece in The Australian concerning some of the unfair and ill-informed criticisms of sentencing decisions in recent years:
https://specialreports.theaustralian.com.au/1437724/cover/
Importantly, she does not say that decisions should not be criticised. However, given that judges are not supposed to respond to criticisms or defend their own decisions, personal attacks against judges and criticisms of decisions which do not show the reasons for the decisions undermine confidence in the Courts, and can threaten judicial independence: Continue reading “Chief Justice of Queensland speaks out for judicial independence”
Author adminPosted on Categories civil litigation, Judiciary 2 Comments on Judge Sandy Street denounced by Federal Court
Litigation is very tough on litigants. They find themselves in an environment where in spite of their strong feelings about their case, their emotions carry no weight and are seldom acknowledged by the court. Furthermore, their fate at trial is the hands of a third party who may rule against them, with disastrous consequences. Adverse findings can be made against them. There is an incredible amount of stress associated with such risks. And of course, there is the massive amount of money they have to pay towards their own legal costs. Continue reading “Judge Sandy Street denounced by Federal Court”
Author adminPosted on Categories Human rights, Judiciary, Liberty 4 Comments on Identity politics, political correctness and section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act
On 4 November 2016, Judge Jarrett of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissed a claim brought by Cindy Prior under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) as a result of posts published on Facebook by students at the Queensland University of Technology that complained of being kicked out of an ‘Indigenous only’ computer lab. This ends a 3 year long legal saga and ordeal for the students concerned.
Continue reading “Identity politics, political correctness and section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act”
Author adminPosted on Categories Evidence, Judiciary Leave a comment on How to be an impressive witness in court
Witnesses are usually assessed according to their credibility and reliability.
In cases where there are disputes of fact, the performance of the relevant witnesses will be critical, as the case is likely to be determined according to which witnesses are believed and which are not.
This article discusses dome of the do’s and don’ts involved in giving evidence at a hearing.
Continue reading “How to be an impressive witness in court”
Author adminPosted on Categories Bill of Rights, Human rights, Judiciary 1 Comment on Response to invitations for submissions concerning a Bill of Rights in Australia
To: The Human Rights Working Group
Queensland Law Society
RE CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS ON A BILL OF RIGHTS
Dear Sir/Madam,
We refer to the invitations for submissions concerning a Bill of Rights in Australia in the February 2016 edition of Proctor.
We write to voice our opposition to a Bill of Rights, for the reasons below.
Continue reading “Response to invitations for submissions concerning a Bill of Rights in Australia”
