@SMO said:
Good old Member [name removed], the man with the magic bow-tie and the famous smokin’ case.
I would say two things.
Nothing an adjudicator says (or a Member) creates a precedent, i.e. decisons do not bind other adjudicators or Members, and [this member] made some real howlers in his time, was the case referred to one of them.It would be interesting to see if CTTT wanted to be consistent on smoking matters.
Having said that i will butt out.
I know which member you are talking about, and yes, I agree with you that some of his decisions are peculiar.
In upholding an appeal of that member’s decision, this is what the judge had to say:
“This rehearing involves consideration of further evidence by the Tribunal Member who has already made unfavourable findings concerning the plaintiff’s credit, and favourable findings of credit of the defendant’s witness. In these circumstances, it is my view that a fair-minded person would entertain a reasonable apprehension that the Tribunal Member might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the rehearing. The ultimate result demonstrates that the Tribunal Member’s discretion miscarried. There is an error with respect to a matter of law. The appeal is upheld. The decision of [this] Senior Tribunal Member dated 28 September 2004 is set aside. The matter is referred to the Tribunal to be dealt with according to law.”