Injudicious interventions

Southwark London Borough Council v Kofi-Adu [2006] EWCA Civ 281; SJ 7 April

There is a risk that if a judge’s interventions take the form of lengthy interrogation of the witnesses he would be unable to properly evaluate and weigh the evidence, thereby rendering the trial unfair. In the present case, the judge s constant and frequently contentious interventions during the oral evidence served to cloud his vision and his judgement to the point where he was unable to subject the oral evidence to proper scrutiny and evaluation. The manner in which the judge conducted the trial led to a failure on his part to discharge his judicial function. Furthermore, there was no rational basis to the judges findings as to the defendant’s entitlement to housing benefits; therefore, the judge’s whole approach to the rent arrears issue was fundamentally flawed and his conclusion on reasonableness in relation to that issue could not stand.