St Michael’s Church of England Junior & Infant School v Smith (Practice and Procedure : Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity) [2014] UKEAT 0165_14_1610 (16 October 2014)

St Michael’s Church of England Junior & Infant School v Smith (Practice and Procedure : Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity) [2014] UKEAT 0165_14_1610 (16 October 2014)

The Employment Judge's interventions, including prolonged questioning, reminders of the oath in a cross-examining manner, and seeking evidence to support the Claimant's case, crossed the line from clarification to advocacy. This conduct would lead the fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias. The right to a fair hearing was undermined, requiring the judgment to be set aside and the case remitted for rehearing before a different tribunal.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0165_14_1610
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Birmingham City Council; Respondent/appellant: Claimant (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
16 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Apparent Bias, Judicial Conduct, Unfair Dismissal, Recusal, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Administrative Law Apparent Bias Judicial Conduct Unfair Dismissal Recusal Employment Tribunal 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Birmingham City Council

Appellant/respondent

Claimant (unnamed)

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge's interventions gave rise to apparent bias
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Judge should have recused himself
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Judge substituted his own view for that of the employer in assessing fairness of dismissal

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Judge's interventions, including prolonged questioning, reminders of the oath in a cross-examining manner, and seeking evidence to support the Claimant's case, crossed the line from clarification to advocacy. This conduct would lead the fair-minded and informed observer to conclude there was a real possibility of bias. The right to a fair hearing was undermined, requiring the judgment to be set aside and the case remitted for rehearing before a different tribunal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Employment Tribunal set aside
  • Case remitted to a new Employment Tribunal for rehearing before a different judge