R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Judgment Date | 1923 |
Date | 1923 |
Year | 1923 |
Court | King's Bench Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
786 cases
-
ASM Shipping Ltd of India v Harris and Others
...R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2)ELR[2000] AC 119. R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthyELR[1924] 1 KB 256. Rustal Trading Ltd v Gill & Duffus SA [2000] CLC 231. Arbitration — Shipping — Removal of arbitrator — Reference to three arbitrato......
- Vereker & Forsyth v Rodda
- Che Hong Yee v Timbalan Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri, Malaysia
- Chua Beow Huat v PP
Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
-
Dealing with disgruntled students: a fine balancing act for educational institutions - part 1
...requires, in essence, that "justice must both be done and be seen to be done". (In the case of R v Sussex Justices: Ex parte McCarthy [1924] 1KB 256 at 259, Lord Hewart CJ emphasised the importance of procedural conduct in maintaining confidence.) It is the concern to avoid a practical inju......
-
COVID-19 Update: Litigation, Incarceration, and Investigation in the Time of COVID-19
...release without exhaustion to Michael Cohen and “Real Housewife” star Brynee Baylor. 53 R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy ([1924] 1 KB 256, [1923] All ER Rep 233). 54 Section 53(1) of Criminal Justice Act 2003 states that “The court may sit for the purposes of the whole or any part of ......
-
Ex Parte Communications In Arbitral Proceedings - Worth The Risk?: Hunt v. The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 2556
...676 at 681 (BCCA). 5 Hunt, supra at para 82; Strata Plan VR 2733 v Jensen, 2000 BCSC 1489 at para 19, citing The King v Sussex Justices, [1924] 1 KB 256 at To view the original article click here The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Speci......
-
Apprehended Bias And Adjudication Determinations
...which provides that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly be seen to be done (R v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy [1924] 1 KB 256). In the adjudication process, would mean that the adjudicator should not only make the correct decision, but should also not engage in any s......
Request a trial to view additional results
75 books & journal articles
-
Preliminary Sections
...v. Sola Sati (1938) 3 WACA 10 599 Rex v. Sunderland Justices (1901) 2 K.B. 357 at 373 C.A. 64 Rex v. Sussex Justice Ex parte McCarthy (1924) 1 K.B. 256 at 259. 64 Roberts v. Holland (1893) 1 0 B 665 495 Robinson v. Chadwick (1887-8) 7 Ch. 878. 680 Royal British Bank v. Turquand (1856) 6 E &......
-
Notes
...telling the truth is not supported by the scientiic evidence” (at 408). 52 Snook et al, above note 31 at 306. 53 R v Sussex Justices , [1924] 1 KB 256, [1923] All ER Rep 233. 54 Judicial Studies Board, above note 9 at 3-18/2. 55 Homa Hoodfar, “The Veil in Their Minds and on Our Heads: The P......
-
2018 index
...94R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 (HL) ........................................................... 395R v Sussex Justices (1924) 1 KB 256 ................................................... 430Schumann [2007] 2 Cr App R (S) 465 .................................................. 285United StatesTran......
-
2017 index
...94R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 (HL) ........................................................... 395R v Sussex Justices (1924) 1 KB 256 ................................................... 430Schumann [2007] 2 Cr App R (S) 465 .................................................. 285United StatesTran......
Request a trial to view additional results