In the absence of a fact scenario to drop on, with respect to Monsieur Joyal, for example, I can't think of an item other than judgments he may have issued that are currently in an appeal period, which would obviously be a very different set of facts from those you're thinking of. I struggle to see.... Without a huge objection to recognizing that you should make sure that there's not an apprehension of bias when you're taking a decision, I have trouble figuring out how that would fit into the consultation process, given the very fact-specific nature of any claim of bias.
