Quote of the week

Although judicial proceedings will generally be bound by the requirements of natural justice to a greater degree than will hearings before administrative tribunals, judicial decision-makers, by virtue of their positions, have nonetheless been granted considerable deference by appellate courts inquiring into the apprehension of bias. This is because judges ‘are assumed to be [people] of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances’: The presumption of impartiality carries considerable weight, for as Blackstone opined at p. 361 in Commentaries on the Laws of England III . . . ‘[t]he law will not suppose possibility of bias in a judge, who is already sworn to administer impartial justice, and whose authority greatly depends upon that presumption and idea’. Thus, reviewing courts have been hesitant to make a finding of bias or to perceive a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a judge, in the absence of convincing evidence to that effect.

L'Heureux-Dube and McLachlin JJ
Livesey v The New South Wales Bar Association [1983] HCA 17; (1983) 151 CLR 288
13 September 2011

Dikgang Moseneke to speak on balance between will of the people and supremacy of the Constitution

Invitation to Claude Leon Human Rights Lecture

 

UCT Law Faculty invites you to the second annual Claude Leon Human Rights Lecture to be delivered by

Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke

on 29 September 2011 at 17:30 in LT1 in the Kramer Law Building, Middle Campus, UCT, on the topic:

“Striking a balance between the will of the people and the supremacy of the constitution.”

Snacks and drinks will be served after the lecture. Please RSVP to Rene Francke at 021 6503072 or rene.francke@uct.ac.za

SPONSORED BY JUTA PUBLISHERS

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest