GAR v Attorney General of New South Wales and Supreme Court of New South Wales

The applicant, GAR, sought judicial review of the dismissal of an application made under section 78 of the *Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001* (NSW) for review of a conviction for sexual intercourse without consent. GAR applied to disqualify all judges of the Supreme Court of New South Wales from hearing the summons for judicial review, alleging a judicial conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. The matter came before McColl JA.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, might reasonably apprehend that all judges of the Supreme Court of New South Wales might not decide the applicant's case impartially, thus giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. A further issue was whether the principle of necessity could be invoked to permit the judges to hear the matter despite any potential apprehension of bias.

McColl JA considered the applicant's allegations of a judicial conspiracy and found that they were entirely unsubstantiated and lacked any factual basis. The Court applied the well-established test for apprehended bias, which requires consideration of whether a fair-minded lay observer would entertain a reasonable apprehension that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the issue. In this instance, the Court concluded that no such apprehension could reasonably be entertained regarding the impartiality of the Supreme Court judges. The principle of necessity was also considered, but ultimately not required to be applied given the lack of any reasonable apprehension of bias.

The motion to disqualify all judges of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was dismissed.