FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| ALIGANTE & WAUGH (NO. 2) | [2010] FamCA 554 |
| FAMILY LAW – COURTS AND JUDGES – Disqualification – Application for disqualification of judge on the ground of apprehended bias arising from prejudgment – Where the proceedings were governed by the provisions of Division 12A Part VII Family Law Act – The work done by s 69ZR Family Law Act in circumstances where findings have been made; contested matters have been determined and interim orders have been made before final orders are made – The effect of the delay in bringing the application for disqualification - Application for disqualification dismissed |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth): ss 60CA; 69ZM(3); 69ZN(3), (4) and (7); 69ZQ(b) and (g); 69ZR(1), (2) and (3); 69ZX(3) Family LawRules - 16.04; 16.08; 16.09; 16.10 |
| AON Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 |
| APPLICANT: | Mr Aligante |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Waugh |
| INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Fiona Reid |
| FILE NUMBER: | SYF | 3075 | of | 2004 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 6 July 2010 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Sydney |
| PLACE HEARD: | Sydney |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Watts J |
| HEARING DATE: | 28 June 2010 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Mr Barry |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Legal Aid NSW |
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Mr Thomas |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Miller & Young Solicitors |
| COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Mr Schonell |
| SOLICITORS FOR INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYERS | Reid Family Lawyers |
Orders
Order 2 made 28.6.10
Leave be granted to the mother to make an oral application that I disqualify myself. That oral application is dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Aligante & Waugh is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
FILE NUMBER: SYF 3075 of 2004
| MR ALIGANTE |
Applicant
And
| MS WAUGH |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
The matter was originally set down on 28 June 2010 to:
1.1.Consider whether any evidence filed by the mother, which put in issue the qualification and competence of Dr W, would be admitted during the final stage of the hearing;
1.2.Consider the “Application in a Case…
Continue reading Aligante and Waugh (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Aligante and Waugh (No 2) [2010] FamCA 554
- Case
- [2010] FamCA 554
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the judge should disqualify himself from hearing the matter, based on an oral application made by the mother.
Watts J considered the application for disqualification and ultimately dismissed it. The judge's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that there were no grounds for recusal.
Consequently, the court made an order on 28 June 2010, dismissing the mother's application for the judge to disqualify himself.
Orders
Orders of the court
Order 2 made 28.6.10
1.
Leave be granted to the mother to make an oral application that I disqualify myself. That oral application is dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.