Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-kpmwg Total loading time: 0.333 Render date: 2021-12-05T17:21:42.314Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Chapter 6 - Judicial conduct

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

Enid Campbell
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
H. P. Lee
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Judges are expected to observe high standards of conduct, in both their official and private capacities. Sir Gerard Brennan once said: ‘High standards of judicial conduct are rightly expected by the community, for public confidence in the Courts and Judges is essential to their authority and therefore essential to the rule of law’.

This requirement is reiterated as a fundamental principle by international instruments. The most significant of these instruments, the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, requires judges to ‘conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary’.

Justice J B Thomas has said that: ‘It is necessary for the continuity of the system of law as we know it, that there be standards of conduct, both in and out of court, which are designed to maintain confidence in those expectations’.

The question arises as to what these standards are. The conduct of judges, both on and off the Bench, is regulated by a combination of rules of law, conventions and ethics. The criminal law, whether expressed via the common law or by statutes, proscribes certain conduct that strikes at the heart of the system of administering justice. These forms of behaviour are so repugnant that they are, or should be, plainly obvious to holders of judicial office. There are other forms of behaviour, however, that do not amount to criminal offences but which, if engaged in by a judge, would affect the standing of the judiciary. A good example is when a judge insists on adjudicating on a matter where he or she has an undoubted vested interest. In such a case, the rule against bias operates to maintain public confidence in the judiciary. In relation to ‘judicial ethics’, Justice J B Thomas observed: ‘The term “ethics”, as understood in the practical sense, commonly refers to a collection of rules or standards of conduct expected of a particular professional group’.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Australian Judiciary , pp. 152 - 185
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brennan, GerardForeword to the Second EditionThomas, J BJudicial Ethics in AustraliaLexisNexis Butterworths 2009 viiGoogle Scholar
United Nations 1985
1989
Wade, H W RForsyth, C FAdministrative LawOxford University PressForsyth, C F 2009 380Google Scholar
Kirby, J 2000
1983
1976
Aronson, MDyer, BGroves, MJudicial Review of Administrative ActionThomson Reuters 2009Google Scholar
Kirby, J 2000
Groves, MThe Rule Against Bias 2009 39 Hong Kong Law Journal485Google Scholar
1992
1990
1994
2011
1994
1992
1977
1991
1977
1978
1982
1991
1991
1992
1864
1969
1985
1992
2011
1976
1912
1962
1986
1987
1987
1989
1989
1979
1976
1978
1989
1992
1991
1994
2003
2006
2008
1989
1994
Campbell, EReview of Decisions on a Judge’s Qualification to Sit 1999 15 Queensland University of Technology Law Journal1Google Scholar
1994
1992
1978
1975
Campbell, CJudges, Bias and Recusal in AustraliaLee, H PJudiciaries in Comparative PerspectiveCambridge University Press 2011Google Scholar
2000
1983
2011
2000
1991
1983
2006
1986
1988
Pesce, GDisqualification of Judges – The “Reasonable Man” Test Renamed 1996 70 Australian Law Journal484Google Scholar
2000
Malleson, KJudicial Bias and Disqualification after 2000 63 Modern Law Review119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olowofoyeku, A AThe Nemo Judex Rule: The Case against Automatic Disqualification 2000 Public Law456Google Scholar
Forsyth, CJudges, bias and recusal in the United KingdomLee, H PJudiciaries in Comparative PerspectiveCambridge University Press 2011 361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000
1974
1975
1996
1983
1992
1993
1998
Young, P WBias from Extra-judicial Writings 2000 74 Australian Law Journal123Google Scholar
Young, P WExtra-Judicial Writings May Disqualify Judge 2000 74 Australian Law Journal584Google Scholar
2000
1988
1989
1997
1996
1975
1986
1980
1990
1991
1989
1990
2000
1988
1992
1998
1996
1958
1998
1995
1996
1982
1985
1971
1977
1976
1977
1994
Abadee, AProfessional Liability of Barristers 2003 Bar News: Journal of the NSW Bar Association21Google Scholar
Baxt, BThe foresight saga 2001 72 Charter54Google Scholar
2000
1986
1984
1988
1990
1991
1991
1998
Bradford, ACasenote: : Disqualifications and Associateships 2000 10 Journal of Judicial Administration69Google Scholar
Young, P WA Judge and an Associate 2000 74 Australian Law Journal744Google Scholar
2000
1994
1995
1852
1999
2000
Mason, AJudicial Disqualification for Bias or Apprehended Bias and the Problem of Appellate Review 1998 1 Constitutional Law and Policy Review21Google Scholar
2000
1937
2000
2006
1979
1989
1991
1995
1996
1991
2000
1996
Groves, MWaiver of The Rule Against Bias 2009 35 Monash University Law Review315Google Scholar
Campbell, EWaiver of the Rule against Bias – A Constitutional Issue 1999 2 Constitutional Law and Policy Review41Google Scholar
2000
1979
1989
1990
1992
1992
1998
1992
2003
2003
1998
Tilmouth, SWilliams, GThe High Court and the Disqualification of One of its Own 1999 73 Australian Law Journal72Google Scholar
Campbell, ERevocation and Variation of Administrative Decisions 1996 22 Monash University Law Review30Google Scholar
Hammond, GJudicial RecusalHart Publishing 2009 148Google Scholar
2000
1986
1983
1998
1998
2010
2009
1997
1979
1967
1966
1972
1977
1978
1971
1979
Kirby, MWorld-standard ethics coming to a court near youThe AgeMelbourne 2001 11Google Scholar
Thomas, J BGuide to Judicial Conduct: A New Handbook for Judges 2003 77 Australian Law Journal240Google Scholar
1991
Thomas, J BJudicial Ethics in AustraliaLawBook 1996Google Scholar
2007 1
Hodes, W WBias, the appearance of bias, and judicial disqualification in the United StatesLee, H PJudicaries in Comparative PerspectiveCambridge University Press 2011Google Scholar
2010

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Judicial conduct
  • Enid Campbell, Monash University, Victoria, H. P. Lee, Monash University, Victoria
  • Book: The Australian Judiciary
  • Online publication: 05 December 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028431.007
Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

  • Judicial conduct
  • Enid Campbell, Monash University, Victoria, H. P. Lee, Monash University, Victoria
  • Book: The Australian Judiciary
  • Online publication: 05 December 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028431.007
Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

  • Judicial conduct
  • Enid Campbell, Monash University, Victoria, H. P. Lee, Monash University, Victoria
  • Book: The Australian Judiciary
  • Online publication: 05 December 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028431.007
Available formats
×