Lord Neuberger,
Lady Hale,
Lord Mance,
Lord Reed,
Lord Hughes,
Lord Toulson,
Lord Kerr
Judgment date
25 June 2015
Language
English
Summary
Ad hoc appointment did not undermine judicial independence; judge-alone trial decision is an evaluative balancing, not a criminal-standard proof matter.
Flynote
Constitutional law — right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial court — security of tenure and ad hoc judicial appointments. Judicial independence — individual and institutional independence; role of an independent Judicial Service Commission. Criminal procedure — trial without jury under statutory "interests of justice" test is an evaluative balancing exercise, not governed by the criminal standard of proof. Evidence/admissibility distinction — factual preconditions requiring proof vs evaluative judicial judgments in the interests of justice.
Ad hoc appointment did not undermine judicial independence; judge-alone trial decision is an evaluative balancing, not a criminal-standard proof matter.
Flynote
Constitutional law — right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial court — security of tenure and ad hoc judicial appointments. Judicial independence — individual and institutional independence; role of an independent Judicial Service Commission. Criminal procedure — trial without jury under statutory "interests of justice" test is an evaluative balancing exercise, not governed by the criminal standard of proof. Evidence/admissibility distinction — factual preconditions requiring proof vs evaluative judicial judgments in the interests of justice.
Loading PDF...
This document is 253.3 KB. Do you want to load it?