Impartiality

[Magrew]

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?

[labman]

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!)

[Magrew]

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?

[labman]

Re: Impartiality

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!!!!!!!

[Magrew]

Re: Impartiality

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?

[labman]

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,

[Bill-K]

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.

[Magrew]

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.