Case No. UKUT-00293-(IAC)

that the tribunal was bias.” See Porter v Magill [2001] UKHL 67, at [103]. In Re Medicaments [2001] 1 WLR 700, the Court of Appeal provided the following exposition of the task of the appellate, or review, court or tribunal: “ The Court must first ascertain all the circumstances which have a bearing on the suggestion that the Judge was bias. It must then ask whether those circumstances would lead a fair minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility … that the Tribunal was bias. The material circumstances will include any explanation given by the Judge under review as to his knowledge or appreciation of those circumstances. ” In Lawal v Northern Spirit [2003] UKHL 35, the House of Lords reiterated the importance of first identifying the circumstances which are said to give rise to apparent bias.” In [8], this Tribunal emphasised that one of the important attributes of the hypothetical reasonable observer is that he is duly informed. What this means is that the reasonable observer is aware of everything bearing on the question of the judge’s impartiality. In short the hypothetical reasonable observer is endowed with greater and fuller attributes than his jurisprudential predecessor, the innocent bystander. 16. I turn to consider another dimension of this appeal. The judicial