Dunwell & Ors and Dunwell (Disqalification)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DUNWELL AND ORS & DUNWELL (DISQALIFICATION) [2010] FamCA 433

FAMILY LAW – COURTS AND JUDGES – Application for disqualification – applicant asserted actual prejudgment or a reasonable apprehension of prejudgment – affidavit filed by the wife in support of application

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Antoun v R (2006) 224 ALR 51
Aon Risk Services Australia Limited and Australian National University [2009] 239 CLR 175
Brown & Brown (No 2) [2007] FamCA 493
Buller Ski Lifts Ltd v Mt Buller Alpine Resort Management Board [2000] VSCA 31 (unreported, Phillips, Charles and Batt, JJA, 9 March 2000)
Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design and Developments Pty Ltd [2006] HCA 55
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy; Clenae Pty Ltd v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (2001) 205 CLR 337
H and N [2003] FamCA 613; [2003] FamCA 1284
Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488
O’Rourke v P & B Corporation Pty Ltd [2008] WASC 36 (S) (Unreported, Martin CJ, 14 March 2008)
R v Watson; Ex parte Armstrong (1976) 136 CLR 248
Re JRL; ex parte CJL (1986) 161 CLR 342
Smits v Roach (2006) 227 CLR 423
Stephens and Stephens (Stay Application) [2010] FamCAFC 20

APPLICANT: Ms Dunwell

2^nd APPLICANT: Mulligan Solicitors

3^RD APPLICANT: Mr Volker

4^TH APPLICANT: Ms James

RESPONDENT: Mr Dunwell

FILE NUMBER: SYC 8682 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 24 May 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Justice Le Poer Trench

HEARING DATE: 12 April 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Richardson SC
Mr Beaumont

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mulligan Solicitors

SOLICITOR FOR THE 2^ND APPLICANT: Mulligan Solicitors

SOLICITOR FOR THE 3^ND APPLICANT: Mulligan Solicitors

SOLICITOR FOR THE 4^TH APPLICANT: Mulligan Solicitors

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Dr Harper SC
Mr Gould

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Barkus Doolan Kelly

Orders

1. The application filed by the applicants Ms Dunwell, Mulligan Solicitors, Mr Volker and Ms James on 6 April 2010 is dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Dunwell and Ors & Dunwell (Disqualification) is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 8682 of 2007

MS DUNWELL

Applicant

And

MULLIGAN SOLICITORS

2^nd Applicant

And

MR VOLKER

3^rd Applicant

And

MS JAMES

4^th Applicant

And

MR DUNWELL

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. Before the Court there is an application filed by the wife, Mulligan Solicitors, Mr Volker and Ms James, all of whom seek that I disqualify myself from the further hearing of these proceedings. The application is supported by an affidavit of one of the applicants, namely the wife. In my experience it is unusual for an application for disqualification based on an allegation of apprehended bias, for a lay party to the proceedings, to file an affidavit supporting the application for disqualification. Mr Richardson SC, Counsel for the husband, did not object to the affidavit on the proviso that…