The Supreme Court exercising its jurisdiction based on the Administration of Justice (Various Provisions) (Amendment) Law of 2022, Law 145(I)/2022 and Article 9(3)(e) considered an application for exemption of a judge who, prior to her appointment as a judge, worked in the Law Office of one of the parties and was a colleague of the lawyer handling the case. The Supreme Court, based on the testimony presented, decided that the average citizen, a fair-minded and informed observer, knows that the Judge had no involvement in the case, and dismissed the application for exemption.
In the event that it was presented that the Judge had, then, discussed the case with her colleague or with anyone else, then the question of her exclusion would have been judged on a different basis.
The Court emphasized that the need for transparency and protection of the rights of the parties shall not lead the judge to an unreasonable or, unjustified waiver of his duty to adjudicate on the case assigned to him, nor to the recognition of a party’s right to choose the judge, who will adjudicate his case.
For further information on this topic please contact
Mrs. Anna Lamprou( alamprou@pittaslegal.com ) at SOTERIS PITTAS & CO LLC,
by telephone (+357 25 028460) or by fax (+357 25 028461)
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advise should be sought about your specific circumstances.
