Bloomberg & Rod

The case of Bloomberg & Rod involved a family law dispute between the father and mother of two children. The father, who was self-represented, appealed against several orders made by the trial judge, including the reliance on a Family Assessment Report, the handling of evidence from a psychiatrist, and the perceived bias of the trial judge. Additionally, the mother cross-appealed against certain orders related to the children's medical and therapeutic treatment. The father argued that the trial judge failed to give sufficient weight to various factors, including the mother's influence over the children, the financial implications of the orders, and the father's positive relationship with the children. The father also claimed that the trial judge punished him and condoned child abuse, and that the orders made were not in the children's best interests. The mother's cross-appeal focused on the trial judge's order that the children could not undergo counselling or therapy without the father's consent.

The court examined the grounds of appeal and cross-appeal, including the trial judge's handling of evidence, procedural fairness, and potential bias. The court found that the father had failed to establish any reasonable apprehension of bias or prejudgment by the trial judge, and that he had waived his right to object by not seeking the trial judge's disqualification. The court also found that the father had not been denied procedural fairness, as he was allowed enough time to present his case and raise objections. Furthermore, the court found no merit in the father's claims that the trial judge erred in making orders that were not in the children's best interests or that he failed to give sufficient weight to various factors.

The cross-appeal by the mother was also dismissed, as the court found that the trial judge's order regarding the children's counselling or therapy was not erroneous. The court concluded that the appeal and cross-appeal were wholly unsuccessful, and since the father was bona fide in bringing the appeal, no order as to costs was made. The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal and cross-appeal, and to make no order as to costs.