Judge quits £3bn BA case af ter court rant over his own lost bags
A JUDGE has j ust as much right as anyone to complain when an airline loses his luggage.
But airing his grievance forcibly while presiding over an unrelated £3billion case involving the same airline might not have been the wisest move.
Amid accusations of bias, Mr Justice Peter Smith, one of England’s most senior – and colourful – judges, has agreed to step down from the case.
The High Court judge was hearing a dispute involving BA, tens of thousands of firms and 30 other airlines in London.
But coincidentally, after his baggage went missing on a recent trip to Italy, he had sent emails to BA’s chairman using his judicial title, accusing staff of deliberately leaving behind all the plane’s luggage and deceiving passengers.
Unfortunately, he then decided to include his own baggage woes in the separate multi-billionpound case being played out in his courtroom.
In an extraordinary rant, Mr Justice Smith threatened to order BA’s chief executive to the court to explain how a whole aeroplane’s luggage could accidentally go missing before his bags ‘spontaneously’ turned up at his home last week.
He told BA’s legal team, led by Jon Turner, QC: ‘ Right, Mr Turner, here is a question for you: what happened to [the] luggage?’
When the barrister replied that they were not dealing with that issue the judge insisted: ‘I am asking you – what has happened to the luggage?’
The lawyer again declined to address his request, leading to Mr Justice Smith to warn: ‘In that case, do you want me to order your chief executive to appear before me today?’
Told it would be inappropriate to discuss a personal dispute, the j udge replied: ‘ What is inappropriate is the continued failure of your clients to explain a simple question, namely, what happened to the luggage? It has been two weeks since that happened.’
After objecting to doubts being cast on his impartiality, the judge said: ‘ I do not believe for a minute that the reasonably minded observer would think that merely because I had raised issues about the non-delivery of my luggage, that it should raise the possibility of bias.’
But when BA’s l egal team applied for the judge to stand aside this week, he agreed. A new judge will now have to be appointed in his place to preside over the case, dating back to 2006, over a European Commission ruling that BA was guilty of colluding to fix air cargo charges.
Mr Justice Smith is known as one of the legal profession’s most characterful f i gures, having hidden a message in a High Court judgment relating to the Da Vinci Code copyright trial.
The judge took a leaf out of Dan Brown’s global bestselling novel to hide his own ‘Smithy Code’ message in i talicised l etters in t he first s even paragraphs of t he 71- page court document.
‘What happened to the luggage?’