Judicial principles and studies
Reconsideration: Judge's Disqualification to Hear a Case
The study summarizes the Court of Cassation's criteria for a judge's disqualification, and explains the effect of a judge's participation in multiple appellate decisions issued at the same stage.
Courts and procedure
Judicial principles and studies
Updated: 10 September 2026
Editorial summary of a judicial principle or decision; consult the source below and do not treat the firm as the author of the decision.
Smart reading summary
Understand and share the study quickly
The study summarizes the Court of Cassation's criteria for a judge's disqualification, and explains the effect of a judge's participation in multiple appellate decisions issued at the same stage.
Key points
- Subject
- Summary
- Practical significance
Useful for: Useful for initial reading and identifying questions that may need legal review.
This automatic summary is based on the published text. It is not legal advice and does not replace checking official sources and reviewing the facts with a qualified lawyer.
AI generation is optional and subject to Gemini usage limits. Do not send client data or attachments from this card.
Subject
The points summarize the Court of Cassation's rule that a judge is disqualified to hear a case only if the judge previously adjudicated the same case at a lower court stage. Repeated consideration of the same case within the same trial stage, or adjudication of similar or related cases, is not by itself a ground for disqualification. The summary refers to a Court of Cassation precedent (1612/2022) and notes an instance where a judge participated in a five-judge appellate decision (2021/4427) and later in a general appellate decision (2023/4324) concerning the same dispute.
Summary
The settled principle is that prior adjudication counts as a disqualifying cause when it occurred at a lower stage of the proceedings, not when the judge simply heard the matter again at the same stage or heard related matters. Given that the two decisions mentioned were issued at the same appellate stage, the authority found that the judge's later participation did not violate Article (123/6) of the Civil Procedure Law and also noted no breach of Article (132/6) as set out in the points. This summary is for general educational purposes and is not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
- Emphasizes that disqualification based on prior consideration requires the earlier decision to have been at a lower stage of the proceedings. - Participation of a judge in multiple decisions issued at the same appellate stage does not automatically warrant a recusal request under the cited provisions. - Clarifies the scope for challenging a judge on grounds of "prior adjudication" in light of the cited jurisprudence.
Frequently asked questions
Subject?
The points summarize the Court of Cassation's rule that a judge is disqualified to hear a case only if the judge previously adjudicated the same case at a lower court stage. Repeated consideration of the same case within the same trial stage, or adjudication of similar or related cases, is not by itself a ground for disqualification. The summary refers to a Court of Cassation precedent (1612/2022) and notes an instance where a judge participated in a five-judge appellate decision (2021/4427) and later in a general appellate decision (2023/4324) concerning the same dispute.
Summary?
The settled principle is that prior adjudication counts as a disqualifying cause when it occurred at a lower stage of the proceedings, not when the judge simply heard the matter again at the same stage or heard related matters. Given that the two decisions mentioned were issued at the same appellate stage, the authority found that the judge's later participation did not violate Article (123/6) of the Civil Procedure Law and also noted no breach of Article (132/6) as set out in the points. This summary is for general educational purposes and is not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance?
- Emphasizes that disqualification based on prior consideration requires the earlier decision to have been at a lower stage of the proceedings. - Participation of a judge in multiple decisions issued at the same appellate stage does not automatically warrant a recusal request under the cited provisions. - Clarifies the scope for challenging a judge on grounds of "prior adjudication" in light of the cited jurisprudence.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.
Study collection
Courts, judicial principles, and enforcement
Browse the other studies in this subject through its dedicated topical section.
Open study collectionA related service path
Commercial and civil litigation
If this study is close to your matter, review the service scope and contact the firm to discuss the facts and documents.
Review the related serviceRelated Jordanian-law guides
Contextual links to related public guide routes; they remain limited to Jordanian law and do not replace matter review.