The Staff of Government Division (the Isle of Man’s Appeal Court) (the SGD) recently handed down its judgment in Moussavi v Broadsheet LLC (in liquidation) & VR Global Partners, L.P. refusing to grant the application of Mr Kaveh Moussavi (Mr Moussavi) for the recusal of the SGD’s three-judge panel. In doing so, the SGD provided helpful clarity on the legal tests applicable to judicial recusal.
By way of three letters sent to the SGD between February and March 2025, Mr Moussavi sought the immediate recusal of His Honour Judge of Appeal Cross KC, Acting Deemster Sir Nigel Teare and Acting Deemster Moran KC from any further involvement in the proceedings (the Recusal Request). This was due to Mr Moussavi’s concerns of alleged bias and impartiality in relation to two previous decisions of the SGD in November 2024 and March 2025. Their Honours deemed Mr Moussavi’s three letters to constitute a formal application despite Mr Moussavi not issuing the appropriate application notice.
The Recusal Request forms a small part of Broadsheet’s long and interesting history before the Manx Courts.
On the test of recusal, the SGD considered the leading Manx case Eurotrust International Ltd v Barlow Clowes International Ltd 2001-03 MLR 330 (Eurotrust). In Eurotrust, the Court followed the leading English case of Porter v Magill [2001] UKHL 67, which applied the following two stage test:
- The Court must ascertain all the relevant circumstances; and
- Whether a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Court was biased.
This test was also applied in the Manx case of Alder & Otrs v Kelly & King 2DS 2020/02.
The SGD also considered the need to “consider the proceedings as a whole” (taken the from the English case of H (A Child) (Recusal) [2023] EWCA Civ 860).
In following these tests and applying them to the facts of the Recusal Request, the SGD comprehensively rejected the five broad grounds relied upon by Mr Moussavi in his Recusal Request. The SGD ultimately determined that whilst it shouldn’t equate the “fair-minded and informed observer” as a judge or a lawyer, it was satisfied that the observer would nonetheless not conclude that there was a real possibility that the Court was biased against Mr Moussavi.
Additionally, the SGD provided insightful guidance into the nature of the Manx judiciary. This was in light of Mr Moussavi’s concerns of potential judicial conflicts of interest and concurrent appointments when the Manx Courts decided previous matters involving him.
On this issue, the SGD clarified the roles of and relationships between Deemsters, Acting Deemsters and the Judge of Appeal. In doing so, the SGD cited an article by Ramsey B Moore OBE (a former Attorney General of the Isle of Man) within the Journal of the Manx Museum in 1961-1962. The SGD commented that this history revealed a “complex past” where “solutions relevant to managing a judicial system of a small island have to be found”. Ultimately, the nature of the Isle of Man’s judiciary, in the circumstances of Mr Moussavi’s Recusal Request, was not a ground to justify recusal.
The decision serves as a useful reminder of the law on recusal in the Isle of Man, and is helpfully tailored to the Island where many principles derive from other jurisdictions, such as England and Wales.
Maher Law’s Tom Maher acted for Gordon Wilson, liquidator of Broadsheet LLC, one of the successful respondents in the Recusal Request.
See our other articles on Removal of Liquidator and No PTA Refusal Appeal to Privy Council in the Broadsheet proceedings.
For more information on how Maher Law’s specialist dispute resolution team can assist in relation to Isle of Man insolvency and other Chancery litigation, please contact Tom Maher at tom@maher.im.
.png)
