Hazan &Elias (No 2)

In *Hazan & Elias (No 2)*, the father applied to the court for the disqualification of Watts J on the grounds of apprehended bias, alleging that the judge had prejudged the proceedings. The proceedings were governed by Division 12A of Part VII of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and specifically, the court considered the application of section 69ZR of the Act, which applies in circumstances where findings have already been made.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the judge's conduct and the stage of the proceedings gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, thereby necessitating disqualification. This involved an assessment of whether the judge had prejudged the matter, particularly in light of the provisions of section 69ZR of the *Family Law Act* and a previous Full Court decision where this section had not been raised as an issue.

Watts J granted leave for the father to make an oral application for disqualification. However, after considering the application, the judge dismissed it. The reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, would have involved an analysis of the objective test for apprehended bias, considering whether a fair-minded lay observer would perceive that the judge had prejudged the issues, taking into account the specific legislative framework and the prior judicial considerations. The orders made reflect the dismissal of the father's application.