Bonney v AG [2021] JRC 174 (17 June 2021)

Bonney v AG [2021] JRC 174 (17 June 2021)

The Magistrate's decision not to recuse herself was wrong in law. Given the prior professional relationship between the Magistrate and the Applicant, the friendship with a character witness, and the need for justice to be seen to be done, a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility of bias. The test in Porter v Magill is met, and the Magistrate should have recused herself.

Citation
[2021] JRC 174
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Applicant (Appellant); Respondent: Attorney General; Presiding Magistrate (subject of Recusal Application): Magistrate Bridget Shaw
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
17 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Way of Case Stated (recusal Application) / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Refusal to Recuse Herself
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Magistrate's decision set aside.
Legal Topics
Judicial Bias, Recusal of Judges, Apparent Bias, Fair Trial, Case Stated Procedure
Criminal Law Judicial Procedure Judicial Bias Recusal of Judges Apparent Bias Fair Trial Case Stated Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant (Appellant)

Applicant/appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

Magistrate Bridget Shaw

Presiding Magistrate (subject of Recusal Application)

Procedural Posture

Appeal by Way of Case Stated (recusal Application) / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Refusal to Recuse Herself

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrate should have recused herself due to alleged apparent bias arising from a prior professional relationship with the Applicant and acquaintance with a character witness.
  2. 2 Whether the decision not to recuse was Wednesbury unreasonable or failed the Porter v Magill test for apparent bias.

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate's decision not to recuse herself was wrong in law. Given the prior professional relationship between the Magistrate and the Applicant, the friendship with a character witness, and the need for justice to be seen to be done, a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility of bias. The test in Porter v Magill is met, and the Magistrate should have recused herself.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Magistrate's decision set aside.

Orders

  • The Magistrate is to recuse herself from presiding over the Applicant's trial.
  • The matter is to be listed before a different Magistrate.