Court of Appeal judge disqualified due to prior consideration of arrest caseCourt of Appeal judge disqualified due to prior consideration of arrest case

The case concerned whether a Court of Appeal judge was disqualified from adjudicating a damages claim because she had previously ruled on an application for arrest (freezing of assets) against one of the parties within the same complex of cases.

A majority of the Supreme Court held that the judge was disqualified, and the judgment of the Court of Appeal was therefore set aside.

The Supreme Court emphasised that a judge’s prior involvement in the same complex of cases at the same level will not normally result in disqualification. In the present case, however, when deciding the arrest application, the judge had addressed several of the same central factual issues that later arose in the damages claim. The arrest order also contained firm statements of fact, as well as remarks concerning one party’s credibility and personal characteristics. In the Supreme Court’s view, this was capable of undermining confidence in the judge’s impartiality.

One justice agreed that the judge was disqualified in principle, but considered the objection to her participation forfeited because it had been raised too late.

The judgment provides guidance on when a judge’s prior consideration of an arrest case may lead to disqualification.

Read the judgment (Norwegian only) (PDF)

Area of law: Civil procedure

Key paragraphs: 18, 25, 26, 31, 32, 43

Justices: Noer, Bergsjø, Berglund, Sæther, Vang