Dimes v Grand Junction Canal

{{short description|1852 UK legal case on judicial bias}}

{{Use dmy dates|date= July 2024}}

{{italic title}}

{{Infobox court case

|name = Dimes v Grand Junction Canal

|court =

|image =

|imagesize =

|imagelink =

|imagealt =

|caption =

|full name =

|date decided = 1852

|citations =

|transcripts =

|judges = Lord Chancellor

|number of judges =

|decision by =

|concurring =

|dissenting =

|concur/dissent =

|prior actions =

|appealed from =

|appealed to =

|subsequent actions =

|related actions = House of Lords

|opinions =

|keywords = Equity law

|italic title =

}}

Dimes v Grand Junction Canal (1852) was a case heard by the House of Lords.

The case addresses the point that "Judges must not appear to be biased". Lord Cottenham presided over a previous case in which a canal company brought a case in equity against a landowner. Lord Cottenham was later discovered to have had shares in said company. The verdict stated that although there was no suggestion that the Lord Chancellor had in fact been influenced by his interest in the company, no case should be decided by a judge with a financial interest in the outcome. It was held that the Lord Chancellor was disqualified from sitting as a judge in the case because he had an interest in the action.