Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Belokoski

Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd (the appellant) sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of a Deputy President of the Workers Compensation Commission. The dispute concerned an application for recusal of the Deputy President, who had previously acted as an arbitrator in an earlier, discontinued proceeding between the same parties. The appellant contended that a comment made by the Deputy President during a directions hearing in the later proceeding, suggesting there was "no real issue regarding injury," gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, as injury was a central issue in the appeal.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Deputy President’s comment, made in the context of a discontinued earlier proceeding where no evidence had been led or findings made on the issue of injury, created a reasonable apprehension of bias in the subsequent appeal. This involved considering the principles of apprehended bias in administrative decision-making, particularly in the context of a judicial officer having prior involvement with the parties.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the comment, made without the benefit of evidence or findings in the earlier proceeding, and in circumstances where the earlier proceeding was discontinued by consent, did not demonstrate a pre-judgment of the issues in the appeal. The Court noted that the comment lacked context and was not based on any determination of evidence. Therefore, it did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court granted leave to appeal but ultimately dismissed the appeal, ordering the appellant to pay the respondent's costs.