• CRIMINAL

United Kingdom Privy Council

Michel Vs. The Queen

Criminal - Criminal trial before Judge - Allegation of bias by Judge in trial - Judge constantly interrupting witnesses, making sarcastic comments and indicating disbelief of defence case during trial proceedings - Whether trial rendered unfair - Whether such behaviour by Trial Judge sufficient to quash conviction despite overwhelming evidence against defendant

Held, a defendant's right to a fair trial is absolute and he is entitled to explain his case, however improbable, without constantly being subjected to the judge's sarcasm and hostility. When the impropriety of a judge's interventions and interruptions in a trial are so extreme as to render the trial unfair, an appeal court has no alternative but to set the conviction aside even when the evidence against the defendant is overwhelming.

• CONTRACT

England and Wales Court of Appeal

Joseph and others Vs. Spiller and another

Contract - Enforceability of contract - Restrictive term contained in separate document to principal contract - Whether term or contract as a whole unenforceable by reason of breach of legislation - Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations 2003.

Held, the question of whether the restrictive term was unenforceable because it was contained in a separate document had to be determined on whether the legislation meant to prohibit the contract as a whole for breach. Applying that test, the failure to put the restrictive clause in the principal document did not render either it or the contract as a whole unenforceable, by reason of the breach as such. There was no clear implication in the 2003 Regulations that either the clause, or the contract as a whole, should be unenforceable for a breach of Regulation 14(2).