“The role of the judge is similar to that of a referee. He or she seeks to
ensure that both sides stay within the rules and that the process is
conducted fairly. However he or she does not seek to influence the
outcome”. Discuss with reference to the role of the judge in either
criminal or civil proceedings.
For decades, there has been a widespread debate on the role of the judge. Due to
contrasting attitudes and opinions, the subject is regarded as a highly controversial
topic because some suggest that their role is similar to that of a referee in respect
that they both carry out similar functions, such as to ensure that both sides stay
within the rules, whilst some would argue that their role is far more complex and that
it deserves to be given more definition to it. The essay will consider the role of the
judge in civil proceedings by examining the extent to which it is similar to a referee.
One could argue that the role of the judge is similar to that of a referee because they
both seek to ensure that both sides stay within the rules. The Civil Evidence Act
1984, which had been developed by the judiciary, can be used as evidence to
support the view because the Act controls the types of evidence that can or cannot
be brought into the court. 1 The Act illustrates the judges intention to ensure that both
sides stay within the rules as it prevents irrelevant material from being placed before
the court which could seriously delay the process and it also prevents material being
2
placed before the court which could be “unfairly prejudicial to the defendant”.
It is essential for both judges and referees to ensure that the process is conducted
fairly or it could lead to a miscarriage of justice. In order to achieve this, the judge
needs to place him or herself in a “thoroughly impartial position between two
disputants”. 3 This means that they will have to be free from any financial or personal
interests which might have an affect on their decision of a case. 4 Failure to do so
would lead to the perception that the judge is “useless to the process as an umpire
1
Partington, M, Introduction to the English Legal System, 3rd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)
2
Ibid. at p. 116
3
Spencer, J.R., Jackson’s Machinery of Justice, 8th edn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)
4
Berlin, M & Dyer, C, The Law Machine, 5th edn (London: Penguin Books, 2000)
ensure that both sides stay within the rules and that the process is
conducted fairly. However he or she does not seek to influence the
outcome”. Discuss with reference to the role of the judge in either
criminal or civil proceedings.
For decades, there has been a widespread debate on the role of the judge. Due to
contrasting attitudes and opinions, the subject is regarded as a highly controversial
topic because some suggest that their role is similar to that of a referee in respect
that they both carry out similar functions, such as to ensure that both sides stay
within the rules, whilst some would argue that their role is far more complex and that
it deserves to be given more definition to it. The essay will consider the role of the
judge in civil proceedings by examining the extent to which it is similar to a referee.
One could argue that the role of the judge is similar to that of a referee because they
both seek to ensure that both sides stay within the rules. The Civil Evidence Act
1984, which had been developed by the judiciary, can be used as evidence to
support the view because the Act controls the types of evidence that can or cannot
be brought into the court. 1 The Act illustrates the judges intention to ensure that both
sides stay within the rules as it prevents irrelevant material from being placed before
the court which could seriously delay the process and it also prevents material being
2
placed before the court which could be “unfairly prejudicial to the defendant”.
It is essential for both judges and referees to ensure that the process is conducted
fairly or it could lead to a miscarriage of justice. In order to achieve this, the judge
needs to place him or herself in a “thoroughly impartial position between two
disputants”. 3 This means that they will have to be free from any financial or personal
interests which might have an affect on their decision of a case. 4 Failure to do so
would lead to the perception that the judge is “useless to the process as an umpire
1
Partington, M, Introduction to the English Legal System, 3rd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)
2
Ibid. at p. 116
3
Spencer, J.R., Jackson’s Machinery of Justice, 8th edn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)
4
Berlin, M & Dyer, C, The Law Machine, 5th edn (London: Penguin Books, 2000)
