17 Nov 2014
PEARCE v TOWER INSURANCE [2014] NZHC 2849
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 2849
- Court
- High Court
The presiding judge recused himself because a fair-minded lay observer, properly informed, could reasonably apprehend he had formed views on the independence of the plaintiff's experts and on the cross-examination application from his prior minutes and directions, creating a real possibility he might not bring an impartial mind to those interlocutory issues; the substantive admissibility and cross-examination issues were not decided and were adjourned to another judge.