Bergman & Bergman (No. 7)

In *Bergman & Bergman (No. 7)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application for the disqualification of a judge, Young J, on the grounds of apprehended bias. The application was brought by the Case Guardian, who alleged that the judge had pre-judged certain issues in the proceedings.

The central legal issue before the court was whether a reasonably objective bystander, aware of the circumstances, would apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the remaining issues in the case. This required an examination of the judge's conduct and pronouncements during interlocutory stages of the proceedings.

Young J dismissed the oral application, finding that the apprehended bias was not established. The judge's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, would have involved an assessment of whether the judge's prior statements or actions, when viewed objectively, demonstrated a closed mind or a predisposition that would prevent fair consideration of the evidence and arguments yet to be presented. The court ultimately concluded that the threshold for disqualification had not been met.