Brisciani v Piscioneri (No 1)

Brisciani (the applicant) sought to disqualify a judge from hearing proceedings on the grounds of apprehended bias. The alleged bias arose from the judge having previously presided over a separate matter involving the applicant, where the legal issues were distinct and the applicant's credit was not a central consideration.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the judge's prior involvement in a separate proceeding with the applicant gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias in the current matter. This required the Court to consider the test for apprehended bias in Australian law, particularly in circumstances where the subject matter and legal issues of the two proceedings did not overlap and the applicant's credibility was not in question in the earlier case.

The Court applied the established test for apprehended bias, which requires an objective assessment of whether a fair-minded lay observer, having considered the relevant facts, would apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the issues to be decided. In this instance, the Court found that the distinct nature of the legal issues in the prior proceeding and the fact that the applicant's credit was not in contention meant that there was no basis for a reasonable apprehension of bias. The judge's prior involvement did not create a situation where the judge might be predisposed to favour or disfavour the applicant in the current proceedings.

The application for disqualification was dismissed.