Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Canadian law, a reasonable apprehension of bias is a legal standard for disqualifying judges and administrative decision-makers for bias. Bias of the decision-maker can be real or merely perceived. The test was first stated in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. Canada (National Energy Board), [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369:
Baker further argued that the duty of fairness owed her by the Minister meant that the decision-makers should be free from any "reasonable apprehension of bias". The court concurred and found on the facts that there was a "reasonable apprehension of bias" in the case of the immigration officer who wrote the notes on the file that were ...
Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities), [1992] 1 SCR 623 is a Canadian administrative law case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court held that the standard of bias may vary depending on the function of the administrative body.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether workers can bring discrimination lawsuits based on unwanted workplace transfers that were allegedly motivated by bias, an issue that can ...
[2] [3] During this case the Supreme Court considered: whether Supreme Court has jurisdiction to set aside its own previous order; whether an appellant must show real likelihood of bias or whether reasonable apprehension of bias suffices; and; whether a prior relationship of legal advisor and client would disqualify a judge. [4]
A federal appeals court on Thursday ordered the judge who oversaw Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's trial to investigate the defense's claims of juror bias and determine whether his death ...
BOSTON (Reuters) -A federal appeals court on Thursday directed a trial judge to assess whether two jurors in Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's 2015 trial were biased and should not have ...
R v. S (RD), [1997] 3 SCR 484, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision which established rules governing reasonable apprehension of judicial bias in the court system and the consideration of social context, such as systemic racism, when rendering judgement.