Dickens & Dickens

In *Dickens & Dickens*, heard by Watts J, the father sought the disqualification of the judge, an adjournment of substantive proceedings, and the discharge of the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL). The father also objected to a specific expert preparing an updated report.

The court was required to determine whether there was apprehended bias justifying the judge's disqualification, whether the substantive proceedings should be adjourned pending appeals, and whether the ICL was acting impartially and in the children's best interests. Further, the court had to consider the father's objection to the impartiality of a previously involved expert and whether that expert should prepare an updated report.

Watts J dismissed the application for disqualification, finding no apprehended bias and no connection between the complaint and the matter to be determined. The application for adjournment was also dismissed, as the court found it to be in the best interests of the children for the matter to proceed. The father’s application to discharge the ICL was dismissed due to a lack of evidence demonstrating actual or perceived bias, incompetence, or a failure to act in the children's best interests. The court was satisfied that the expert previously involved should prepare the updated report, ordering the ICL to provide the expert with relevant documents.