CERWIN & CERWIN

In the matter of *Cerwin & Cerwin*, Judge Brown of the Family Court of Australia considered an application for disqualification. The dispute concerned allegations of sexual abuse and the potential risk to a child, with the applicant seeking the disqualification of a judicial officer.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the judicial officer had demonstrated bias or pre-judgment in relation to the matters in dispute. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the judicial officer's expression of interim views regarding the unacceptable risk to the child, and whether the child should spend time with the person alleged to have committed the abuse, constituted grounds for disqualification.

Judge Brown reasoned that the judicial officer's interim views were expressed in the context of assessing the welfare and best interests of the child, which is the paramount consideration in family law proceedings. The Court applied the legal principle that a judicial officer is not disqualified merely by forming an early or interim view, provided that view is open to reconsideration in light of further evidence or argument. The judicial officer's comments were found not to indicate a closed mind or a pre-determination of the ultimate outcome, but rather an assessment of the issues requiring further investigation.

Consequently, the oral application for disqualification made on 3 October 2019 was dismissed.