Markan v Bar Association of Queensland

In the case of Markan v Bar Association of Queensland, the appellant, Mr Markan, brought an appeal against the Bar Association of Queensland, the respondent, over two separate decisions. The first was the refusal of the primary judge to recuse herself from hearing the respondent's strike-out application in Mr Markan's proceeding against the respondent. The second was the decision of the primary judge to strike out Mr Markan's claim and statement of claim. Mr Markan sought damages for various alleged breaches by the respondent in its investigation of his complaints against his counsel.

The court was required to determine two main legal issues. The first was whether the primary judge was an impartial and independent judge, and if she was correct in concluding that she was not disqualified from hearing the strike-out application. The second was whether the primary judge's exercise of the discretion to strike out Mr Markan's claim and statement of claim was arbitrary, capricious or in bad faith. The court had to consider whether there was a contractual relationship between Mr Markan and the respondent, and if the respondent's conduct fell within the scope of the Australian Consumer Law.

The court dismissed both appeals. In relation to the first issue, the court found that the primary judge was an impartial and independent judge and did not err in concluding that she was not disqualified from hearing the strike-out application. The court held that there was no evidence of bias or lack of impartiality on the part of the primary judge. In relation to the second issue, the court held that the primary judge's exercise of the discretion to strike out Mr Markan's claim and statement of claim was not arbitrary, capricious or in bad faith. The court found that there was no contractual relationship between Mr Markan and the respondent, and that the respondent's conduct did not fall within the scope of the Australian Consumer Law. The court held that the primary judge was correct to strike out the claim and statement of claim. The court also found that Mr Markan must pay the respondent's costs of the appeal to be assessed.