Report comment

Don't see what the fuss is about - every time I have got near the judicial process in this country bias has been leaking from every orifice of the judicial body concerned. Courts bend over backwards to protect interests they favour, e.g. local councils, and there is no effective remedy for it. Many 'civilians' who go through the process are appalled at the mindless adherence of form over function and bias at all levels of the system. Woolf was a half hearted attempt to rectify some of the more blatant examples but the inbuilt inadequacies of the system as it stands and lack of any effective oversight have rendered the changes virtually pointless. The only reason this incident went this far is that a barrister and chambers were called in to question and the judge who did it (i) thought the issue would remain private because only 'brother' barristers were involved (and in the old days it probably would have) and (ii) he was dumb enough to put the matter in writing instead of dropping by at chambers and 'having a chat', the way it is normally done. The fact that the CoA found bias is like finding that a live fish is wet.