Crackin' Snack Pty. Ltd. v Gameking Australia Pty Ltd

In this case, Crackin' Snack Pty. Ltd. sought to appeal against a decision made by the trial judge, and as part of this process, filed several notices of motion. Gameking Australia Pty Ltd opposed these notices, arguing that the trial judge should not be the one to determine them due to an alleged bias against the trial judge. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was tasked with deciding whether the notices of motion, including one seeking to vary a costs order, should be stayed because of the alleged bias against the trial judge. The court also had to consider whether it was in the interests of justice for the costs order to be determined by the trial judge or the Court of Appeal.

The court considered the legal principles surrounding judicial bias and the appropriate circumstances in which a judge should recuse themselves. The court examined the evidence presented to support the allegation of bias and the potential impact of the bias on the outcome of the notices of motion. The court also considered whether the desirability of having the trial judge determine the costs order outweighed the need for a fair and unbiased process.

The court concluded that the allegation of bias against the trial judge was not substantiated by the evidence presented. The court determined that it was in the interests of justice for the trial judge to remain to determine the notices of motion, including the one to vary the costs order. The court found that it was preferable for the trial judge, who was familiar with the case and its context, to determine the costs order. The court dismissed the notice of motion seeking a stay and ordered that the plaintiffs pay the defendants’ costs of the notice of motion as agreed or assessed. The court also confirmed the hearing date before Gibb DCJ of the other notices of motion.