“Unfortunately there has been some misunderstanding of my dates to avoid. My clerk was initially asked to provide dates to avoid up to and including December 2024. This was done. It does appear that just before the Easter rush my clerk was later asked for further dates to avoid in January and February 2025 but unfortunately he misread the email as simply a confirmation of the earlier request for dates to avoid up to December 2024. I unfortunately was not privy to this further request and did not know that the further dates to avoid had been requested.”
“We will look at the court diary and see if it is possible to suggest another date but it will require the moving of other cases and it may not be possible for the other parties. If we can accommodate this request we will endeavour to do so, but it may not be possible. It is why we had these discussions at the hearing. Given the need for all the parties to achieve resolution in this matter we will be looking at listing it at about the same time although it may require listing into March and we do not know whether that will be possible for all the parties.”
“What is the position of this court on an appeal from the judge’s decision not to recuse himself? If the judge had a discretion whether to recuse himself and had to weigh in the balance all the relevant factors, this court would be reluctant to interfere with his discretion, unless there had been an error of principle or unless his decision was plainly wrong. As already indicated, however, I do not think that disqualification of a judge for apparent bias is a discretionary matter. There was either a real possibility of bias, in which case the judge was disqualified by the principle of judicial impartiality, or there was not, in which case there was no valid objection to trial by him. On the issue of disqualification an appellate court is well able to assume the vantage point of a fair-minded and informed observer with knowledge of the relevant circumstances. It must itself make an assessment of all the relevant circumstances and then decide whether there is a real possibility of bias.”
“This is because of the fact that the Post Office waited until almost two weeks after it had received Judgment No, 3 before it did anything in respect of making an application to recuse. Here, there was not only silence by the Post Office, and continuing participation in proceedings, but there was active involvement in the actual Horizon Issues trial”
“recusal applications should be made promptly and may be dismissed if there is inordinate and inexcusable delay in raising the point; such applications go to the heart of the administration of justice and must be raised as soon as reasonably practicable” and Miles J held that “applications of this kind should be made as soon as possible as they affect the administration of justice.”
“that the judge’s treatment of his case was unfair over the course of the proceedings and that he should therefore recuse himself … it is necessary to consider the whole of the proceedings to determine whether the judge’s approach to the aggrieved party has been unfair.”
“The court must first ascertain in all the circumstances which have a bearing on the suggestion that the judge was biased. It must then ask whether those circumstances would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility that the judge was biased: see Porter v Magill”
“Judge Walden-Smith: -- that is fair; and that means that a little more sympathy and empathy on both sides will just help the case proceed in a better way; OK? Second Claimant: Yes, your Honour Judge Walden-Smith: Yes? I mean that makes sense, does it not? Second Claimant: Yes. I mean, I – you know, when I read the emails that – the woman here trying to get my OBE removed and fingers crossed they get a conviction and this sort of thing, I mean it is very – it is quite distressing and this all came in a very late disclosure: 6,146 disclosed two days before we were due to exchange witness statements, on the basis that Pheasantland’s chairman has a law degree and Debenhams Ottaway had maintained that all the correspondence going back was privileged because he had a law degree. So two days before, we are exchanging witness statements, and I have – receive all this: it is very, very distressing. Judge Walden-Smith: OK Second Claimant: Fortunately, I still have my OBE and please let me go on having it. Thank you, your honour.”
“I have stated the atmosphere of this hearing on10 August 2023 was intimidating for me. It is difficult to emphasise how intimidating it was. I was distressed and outnumbered and my sense of injustice was increased by the fact that the judge appeared to be to bend over backwards for the Defendants and failed to intervene when the jeering and smirking was occurring. The clear impression I was given was the judge approved of this conduct.”
“and that an appropriate share of the court’s resources is allotted, taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases. More particularly, as it seems to me, a court when considering a contested application at the 11th hour to adjourn the trial, should have specific regard to: (a) The parties’ conduct and the reason for the delays; (b) The extent to which the consequences of the delays can be overcome before the trial; (c) The extent to which a fair trial may have been jeopardised by the delays; (d) Specific matters affect the trial, such as illness of a critical witness and the like; (e) The consequences of an adjournment for the claimant, the defendant, and the court.” (a) The parties’ conduct and the reason for the delays; (b) The extent to which the consequences of the delays can be overcome before the trial; (c) The extent to which a fair trial may have been jeopardised by the delays; (d) Specific matters affect the trial, such as illness of a critical witness and the like; (e) The consequences of an adjournment for the claimant, the defendant, and the court.”