Report comment

I don't disagree with anything said here - especially not 'apparent -v- actual bias' and recusing oneself if asked to do so on proper grounds. But presumably Mr Varma, having been told that his clients' claim had evidential gaps, took appropriate steps to fill them. Taking the pragmatic view, therefore: is it really in anyone's financial interest to set aside a judgement and incur the costs of a full rehearing if the end result is likely to be the same?