Feranti and Connor (No 5)

In *Feranti and Connor (No 5)*, the father sought the disqualification of the judge presiding over family law proceedings. The father alleged that the judge exhibited bias and prejudice, disregarded factual evidence, legislative procedures, and the best interests of the children, thereby denying him procedural and natural justice.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the judge should be disqualified from hearing the matter based on the allegations of apprehended bias. The court was required to apply the test for apprehended bias as established in *Johnson v Johnson*.

Dawe J applied the test from *Johnson v Johnson*, which requires an objective assessment of whether a fair-minded lay observer, knowing the facts, would apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the issues the judge must decide. After considering the father's assertions, the judge concluded that the threshold for apprehended bias was not met. The judge found no evidence to support the claim that a fair-minded observer would apprehend bias. Consequently, the application for disqualification was dismissed.