Gindy v Capital Lawyers Pty Ltd

The appeal in *Gindy v Capital Lawyers Pty Ltd* concerned allegations of actual and apprehended bias on the part of the primary judge. The appellant, Ms Gindy, argued that the judge's conduct during the hearing demonstrated a lack of impartiality, leading to an unfair trial.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had demonstrated actual bias, or alternatively, whether a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the circumstances, might reasonably apprehend that the judge was not impartial. This required the court to scrutinise the judge's conduct throughout the prolonged and difficult proceedings.

The Court of Appeal found that while actual bias was not established, the primary judge's outward conduct, including expressions of disdain for the appellant's McKenzie friend and a perceived disregard for the appellant herself, was sufficient to give rise to an apprehension of bias. The overall impression conveyed by the judge's demeanour and interactions during the hearing led the appellate court to conclude that the appearance of impartiality had been compromised. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted for a retrial before the Supreme Court.