Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The applicant failed to meet the high onus to show actual or reasonably apprehended bias; criticisms of prior decisions and perceived procedural unfairness are matters for appeal, not recusal; the s.211 report had been ordered and the court's scheduling directions do not demonstrate a predetermined outcome, therefore recusal was not justified and the application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The moving party failed to meet the heavy burden to demonstrate a reasonable apprehension of bias; an adverse ruling in a related proceeding and the administrative assignment of the judge are insufficient grounds for recusal, therefore the motion to recuse is dismissed and no costs are awarded.
Source excerpt
The court dismissed a recusal application, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias from the judge’s Law Society background, assignment, or case management conduct.
The court dismissed a recusal application in a shareholder oppression case, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias and no abuse of process.
The recusal motion was dismissed because the appellant failed to produce clear evidence of serious grounds to displace the strong presumption of judicial impartiality; an informed, reasonable observer would not conclude it was more likely than not the panel member would not decide the pending appeal fairly.
Source excerpt
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed a recusal application, holding that a prior leave-to-appeal decision in related litigation did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.
Although s.669.3 gives a judge appointed to another court authority to continue to preside, that continuation is not mandatory; a judge may divest jurisdiction under s.669.2(1) or by inherent jurisdiction where, as here, the judge's appointment to the Court of Appeal combined with the indeterminate, expanding and potentially lengthy nature of the remaining sentencing proceedings means the judge is unable to continue without unduly encroaching on appellate duties.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed a recusal request made at the start of the appeal, holding that prior appearances before the judge did not establish a reasonable apprehension of bias.
La Cour rejette la demande de récusation: une personne informée n’y verrait pas une crainte raisonnable de partialité fondée sur des ordonnances intérimaires antérieures.
Hearing related proceedings or referring to a separate conviction for context does not, without cogent substantive evidence of prejudice, create a reasonable apprehension of bias; references to R. v. Ladelpha were contextual and not relied upon; the trial judge's credibility findings were supportable and entitled to deference; and the 25 month consecutive sentence was proportionate and fit given the gravity, culpability and the primacy of denunciation and deterrence for offences against justice participants.
Source excerpt
Explore more
