Michel & Ors v Dhanjee & Ors [recusal] (SCA 5 of 2012) [2012] SCCA 23 (31 August 2012)

Michel & Ors v Dhanjee & Ors [recusal] (SCA 5 of 2012) [2012] SCCA 23 (31 August 2012)

The applicant failed to substantiate any actual or perceived bias by the judges. The allegations were unsupported by evidence or authority, and the objective test for recusal was not met. Even if bias were shown, the rule of necessity would require the judges to hear the case.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] SCCA 23
Parties
Appellant: MICHEL; Respondent/applicant: DHANJEE; Appellant: Fourth Appellant; Respondent: Second, Third and Fourth Respondents
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
31 August 2012
Case Number
SCA 5 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application for Recusal of Judges
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Judicial Recusal, Bias, Fair Trial, Natural Justice
Source Language
english
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Judicial Recusal Bias Fair Trial Natural Justice

Source-derived case record

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MICHEL

Appellant

DHANJEE

Respondent/applicant

Fourth Appellant

Appellant

Second, Third and Fourth Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application for Recusal of Judges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant established actual or perceived bias warranting recusal of the judges
  2. 2 Whether the application for recusal was substantiated by evidence or law

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to substantiate any actual or perceived bias by the judges. The allegations were unsupported by evidence or authority, and the objective test for recusal was not met. Even if bias were shown, the rule of necessity would require the judges to hear the case.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for recusal is dismissed with costs.