Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design and Developments Pty Ltd

The case of Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design and Developments Pty Ltd involved a dispute between the parties over a claim of judicial bias. The presiding judge was asked to disqualify himself from hearing the case based on alleged bias. The legal issues that arose in this case were whether there was sufficient evidence to justify the disqualification of the judge and whether the judge should continue to preside over the case if only one party sought his removal.

The court found that there was no viable basis for disqualifying the judge from the case. The submissions made by the applicant's counsel were deemed to be correct and the submissions of the respondents' counsel did not provide a basis for the judge's disqualification. The court noted that it is important to ensure that justice is seen to be done, but it is equally important that judges fulfill their duty to sit and not encourage parties to seek the disqualification of judges to have their case heard by someone who may be more likely to decide in their favour. The court referred to several authorities to support its decision.

The court concluded that it was the duty of the judge to continue presiding over the case as long as the applicant opposed any suggestion of disqualification with apparent justification. The issue of costs for the application for disqualification was reserved for later determination. The court dismissed the application of the respondents for the judge to disqualify himself from the further hearing of the proceedings.

In summary, the court found that there was no reasonable apprehension of bias by the judge that would warrant his disqualification from the case. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that justice is seen to be done, while also fulfilling the duty of judges to sit and not be too readily disqualified from cases. The court dismissed the application for disqualification and reserved the issue of costs for later determination.