likelihood of bias

If he perceives that there is a likelihood of bias, the rules of natural justice have been broken.

The key finding was that the two private contacts with the material witness gave an appearance of a real likelihood of bias.

The real likelihood test centres on whether the facts, as assessed by the court, give rise to a real likelihood of bias.

If a reasonable man would believe that there was a real likelihood of bias then the decision is overturned; surmise or conjecture is insufficient.

Currently, cases from various jurisdictions apply two different tests: "real likelihood of bias" and "reasonable suspicion of bias".

The courts have consistently held that if a pecuniary interest exists it is not necessary to go on to consider reasonable suspicion or real likelihood of bias.

In the nineteenth century cases the former test held sway: if there was no pecuniary interest the court inquired whether there was a real likelihood of bias.

Other types of personal interest may disqualify the decision-maker if the courts find that the interest gave rise to a reasonable suspicion or real likelihood of bias.

In such a case the proceedings of the board will be reduced if his interest was "such as gives rise to a real likelihood of bias on his part."

Two tests have been espoused by the courts, that of 'real likelihood of bias,' and that of 'reasonable suspicion of bias.'

In addition, the word real in the term real likelihood of bias cannot mean "actual", as the test after all pertains to apparent bias and not actual bias.

A Long History Laws Once Gave Penalties by Race To many people, the likelihood of bias seems greatest in interracial killings, with blacks who kill whites more likely to receive death sentences.

Later cases witnessed the 'competitive invocation' of the two tests, the authority whose decision was to be impugned claiming that the applicant still had to satisfy the higher hurdle of real likelihood of bias.

A 2011 systematic review of acupressure's effectiveness at treating symptoms reported that 16 out of 23 studies had concluded that acupressure was effective, but that that the evaluation also "indicated a significant likelihood of bias" in the studies.

According to him, "[t]he common substance of both tests appears, in a nutshell, to be this: The key question is whether or not there was a perception on the part of a reasonable person that there would be a real likelihood of bias".

Administrative decisions should only be overturned if the higher hurdle of real likelihood of bias could be overcome, and there are suggestions that the test should be further modified when the administrative body, such as a local authority, necessarily has an interest in the outcome of a decision.

It was stated in Cook International Inc. v. B.V. Handelmaatschappij Jean Delvaux (1985) that the contrast between the tests was between reasonable suspicion of bias on the one hand, and the appearance of a real likelihood of bias on the other.

Nonetheless, he expressed the obiter view that the "reasonable suspicion of bias" test established in Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin and Tang Liang Hong was not significantly different from the English "real likelihood of bias" test (also known as "real possibility of bias" test).

However, in Tang Kin Hwa v. Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board (2005), Judicial Commissioner Andrew Phang expressed the view that there is no difference in substance between the "reasonable suspicion of bias" test and what has been termed the "real likelihood of bias" test.

However, other reviews, including one in the New England Journal of Medicine and a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies, found that the evidence does not support its use in the treatment of plantar fasciitis, with the highest quality studies (with the least likelihood of bias) showing no evidence of efficacy.