• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Impartiality

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Impartiality

    Has anyone got a view on this one?

    A person takes an organisation to a specialist tribunal. They are not happy with the decision so they appeal to a higher court, at the appeal the tribunal's case is prepared by the agent who had represented the original authority in the first action.

    The person then raises a new, but related action against the original authority, they are again represented by the same agent. The action is raised to the same specialist tribunal but with a different three members sitting.

    Taking into account the possibility that the specialist tribunal could hold some loyalty for the agent, would this appear to a reasonable man to be free of any potential bias.

    If it could bring the possibility of a lack of impartiality, how could it be rectified?
    'I don't see why everyone depends on me. I'm not dependable. Even I don't
    depend on me, and I'm me.'
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Impartiality

    Sorry Magrew, you've lost me in the first two paragraphs. I know that's not hard, but I'd like to get my head round it.

    Any chance of explaining to a Labman with additional learning needs (note the Scottish phraseology for you!)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Impartiality

      Thanks labman, that's the closest an Englishman can get to being bilingual (mind you thinking on it you are probably Welsh).

      I am not sure how I can make it clearer without making it more complicated. If you substitute "organisation" with "authority" does that help?
      'I don't see why everyone depends on me. I'm not dependable. Even I don't
      depend on me, and I'm me.'

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Impartiality

        Originally posted by Magrew View Post
        Has anyone got a view on this one?

        at the appeal the tribunal's case is prepared by the agent who had represented the original authority in the first action.
        Origianally English, now an illegal immigrant!

        The bit above confuses me. Surely the tribunal hears the case, it doesn't have a case of its own?

        Sorry, me being thick AGAIN!!!!!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Impartiality

          Originally posted by labman View Post

          The bit above confuses me. Surely the tribunal hears the case, it doesn't have a case of its own?

          Right I now know what is confusing you.

          When the first decision was appealed the response to that appeal was prepared by the agent that represented the authority, thing is the appeal is against the decision of the tribunal. He therefore represented the tribunal at the higher court. Now he is back representing the authority again in a different action.

          So having been the tribunal's agent and the authorities agent would that not taint matters now creating a definite posssibility of loyalty bias in the new action?
          'I don't see why everyone depends on me. I'm not dependable. Even I don't
          depend on me, and I'm me.'

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Impartiality

            Right, now that makes sense. I'm off to bed, but will think on it. They have three different, supposedly impartial members sitting will be their argument as you will know. I'll see what I wake up thinking and will post again tomorrow,

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Impartiality

              FWIW, here's my take on this. In the first instance, it was the Tribunal's case which was prepared by the same agent that prepared the Authority's original case for the tribunal. That in itself seems like a negation of either the Tribunal's supposed impartiality - or that of the agent.

              To then find that the same agent is employed by the Authority in a separate action seems to me to be good cause for objection. But this is not a court of law, and we are not picking jurors. There seems to me to be a good reason to cite the fact that you are 'known' to the agent (by virtue of the previous action), and that this in itself should show that impartiality is compromised at the very least.

              As the Authority's agent, he has every right to act on behalf of the Authority. Once he has acted as the Tribunal's agent, he relinquishes that right IMO, as he must then assume the impartiality of the Tribunal.

              To THEN act as agent for the same Authority, in a separate case subsequently brought by the same plaintiff/appellant cannot be allowed IMO, as it either compromises the Tribunal's impartiality (via the agent) in the earlier appeal - or the agent's ability to act fairly for the Authority in the second case.

              "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other." [Matthew 6:24]
              I dunno if any of that helps, but it's my 'umble submission.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Impartiality

                Sorry folks, I am being pulled in all directions at the moment so I am only getting to this on the odd occassion.

                Check the doc you download from this link at sections 3.2 and 3.3.

                http://www.interights.org/document/106/index.html

                Then take into account that this agent has prepared the specialist tribunal's response against our appeal to the Court of Session. I think there is an apparent conflict.

                A considered view from anyone would be appreciated.
                'I don't see why everyone depends on me. I'm not dependable. Even I don't
                depend on me, and I'm me.'

                Comment

                View our Terms and Conditions

                LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                Working...
                X