The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court judgment awarding the respondent damages for a roofing contract dispute.
The appellant argued the trial was procedurally unfair due to the deputy judge's frequent interventions and comments, which gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
The Divisional Court agreed, finding that the deputy judge's well-intended activism became a reversible error by taking over the trial and improperly limiting the self-represented appellant's cross-examination.
The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered before a different deputy judge.
