Olsen v Olsen

The appeal concerned allegations of apprehended bias against the primary judge, and a claim for provision from the deceased's estate by the appellant, an adult son. The deceased had remarried and left his entire estate to his second wife and her children, leaving nothing to the appellant from his first marriage.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge's comments during a pre-trial hearing indicated a fixed opinion or bias against the appellant or his legal representatives, thereby giving rise to an apprehension of bias. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the deceased had a moral obligation to provide for his adult son, notwithstanding his obligation to his second wife and her family, and the principle of testamentary freedom.

The court found that the primary judge's criticisms of the legal representatives, while perhaps sharp, were justified by the conduct of the proceedings and did not demonstrate a closed mind or bias. The court affirmed that freedom of testamentary disposition is a significant factor in family provision claims, and that while a deceased has a moral obligation to provide for their children, this obligation must be balanced against other moral claims, such as those owed to a surviving spouse. In this instance, the court concluded that the deceased had discharged any moral obligation to the appellant by reason of his substantial provision for his second wife.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.