TAUNOA AND ORS V THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ANOR SC 6/2006

TAUNOA AND ORS V THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ANOR SC 6/2006

The recusal applications were dismissed because no reasonable, objective apprehension of bias was established: the hearing sequence did not amount to predetermination and prior participation by judges in a leave decision (Udompun) on different facts and procedural grounds did not create an appearance of bias on the merits of the present appeal.

Citation
SC 6/2006
Parties
Appellants and Cross Respondent: Christopher Hapimana Ben Mark Taunoa and ors; Respondents: The Attorney General and anor
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
13 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court Appeal With Interlocutory Recusal Applications / Oral Hearing on Substantive Appeal; Recusal Applications Made and Dismissed on 2 November 2006
Outcome
Recusal applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Recusal, Appearance of Bias, Pre Determination, Damages Under Bill of Rights Act, Leave to Appeal
Judicial Recusal/bias Administrative Law Public Law Constitutional Law Recusal Appearance of Bias Pre Determination Damages Under Bill of Rights Act +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Hapimana Ben Mark Taunoa and ors

Appellants and Cross Respondent

The Attorney General and anor

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Supreme Court Appeal With Interlocutory Recusal Applications / Oral Hearing on Substantive Appeal; Recusal Applications Made and Dismissed on 2 November 2006

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a reasonable apprehension of bias arose from the sequence in which oral argument was heard
  2. 2 Whether prior participation by three judges in a leave decision (Udompun) created an appearance of bias on the substantive appeal
  3. 3 Whether inability to replace judges without legislative change or tactical motives justified recusal

Ratio Decidendi

The recusal applications were dismissed because no reasonable, objective apprehension of bias was established: the hearing sequence did not amount to predetermination and prior participation by judges in a leave decision (Udompun) on different facts and procedural grounds did not create an appearance of bias on the merits of the present appeal.

Court Disposition

Recusal applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Applications for recusal dismissed.