Acting Supreme Court justice was not disqualified

A court of appeal judge, who for a period acted as a Supreme Court justice, participated in the hearing of a civil case from the same court of appeal. The losing parties in the Supreme Court requested that the case be reopened due to disqualification, see section 108 of the Courts of Justice Act. The Supreme Court found that the acting justice had not been disqualified, and denied the request for reopening. It was assumed that a court of appeal judge who is temporarily acting as a Supreme Court justice may in principle participate in the review of judgments from the court of appeal where he or she normally works, when he or she has not been involved with the case there. As a general starting point, judges deal with cases professionally and impartially without being influenced by the consideration of colleagues with whom they have an ongoing working relationship. General collegial relations in a large court cannot in themselves justify disqualification. For disqualification to occur, there must be special circumstances that create justified doubts about the impartiality and independence of the judge. There were no such circumstances in this case.

Read the whole order (Norwegian only)

Areas of law: Civil procedure, qualification, section 108 of the Courts of Justice Act 

Key paragraphs: 45, 52, 56, 63

Justices: Webster, Noer, Bull, Sæther, Stenvik