Parbery v QNI Metals Pty Ltd

Link copied
Case Copied 36 min read

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Parbery & Ors v QNI Metals Pty Ltd & Ors [2018] QSC 249

PARTIES:

STEPHEN JAMES PARBERY AND MICHAEL ANDREW OWEN IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS LIQUIDATORS OF QUEENSLAND NICKEL PTY LTD (IN LIQ) ACN 009 842 068
(first plaintiffs)

QUEENSLAND NICKEL PTY LTD (IN LIQ)
ACN 009 842 068
(second plaintiff)

JOHN RICHARD PARK, KELLY-ANNE LAVINA TRENFIELD & QUENTIN JAMES OLDE AS LIQUIDATORS OF QUEENSLAND NICKEL PTY LTD (IN LIQ) ACN 009 842 068
(third plaintiffs)

v

QNI METALS PTY LTD ACN 066 656 175
(first defendant)

QNI RESOURCES PTY LTD ACN 054 117 921
(second defendant)

QUEENSLAND NICKEL SALES PTY LTD
ACN 009 872 566
(third defendant)

CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER
(fourth defendant)

CLIVE THEODORE MENSINK
(fifth defendant)

IAN MAURICE FERGUSON
(sixth defendant)

MINERALOGY PTY LTD ACN 010 582 680
(seventh defendant)

PALMER LEISURE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
ACN 152 386 617
(eighth defendant)

PALMER LEISURE COOLUM PTY LTD
ACN 146 828 122
(ninth defendant)

FAIRWAY COAL PTY LTD ACN 127 220 642
(tenth defendant)

CART PROVIDER PTY LTD ACN 119 455 837
(eleventh defendant)

COEUR DE LION INVESTMENTS PTY LTD
ACN 006 334 872
(twelfth defendant)

COEUR DE LION HOLDINGS PTY LTD
ACN 003 209 934
(thirteenth defendant)

CLOSERIDGE PTY LTD ACN 010 560 157
(fourteenth defendant)

WARATAH COAL PTY LTD ACN 114 165 669
(fifteenth defendant)

CHINA FIRST PTY LTD ACN 135 588 411
(sixteenth defendant)

COLD MOUNTAIN STUD PTY LTD ACN 119 455 248
(seventeenth defendant)

EVGENIA BEDNOVA
(eighteenth defendant)

ALEXANDER GUEORGUIEV SOKOLOV
(nineteenth defendant)

ZHENGHONG ZHANG
(twentieth defendant)

SCI LE COEUR DE L’OCEAN
(twenty-first defendant)

DOMENIC MARTINO
(twenty-second defendant)

and

MARCUS WILLIAM AYRES
(first defendant added by counterclaim)

STEFAN DOPKING
(second defendant added by counterclaim)

FILE NO:

SC No 6593 of 2017

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Applications filed 19 October 2018 (CFI 378 and CFI 381)

DELIVERED ON:

5 November 2018

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

26 October 2018 and 2 November 2018

JUDGE:

Jackson J

ORDER:

The order of the court (on each of the applications) is that:

1.    Jackson J will not sit to hear the trial of the proceeding set down to start on 29 April 2019.

2.    Otherwise, the application is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

COURTS AND JUDGES – JUDGES – DISQUALIFICATION FOR INTEREST OR BIAS – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – PREJUDGMENT – where submitted findings made in previous case about credit of fourth defendant give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias – where common ground that credit of fourth defendant will be in issue at trial – whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the credit of the fourth defendant – whether a case of real doubt where prudent for judge not to sit

COURTS AND JUDGES – JUDGES – DISQUALIFICATION FOR INTEREST OR BIAS – GENERALLY – whether other miscellaneous grounds give rise to apprehended bias

Bahonko v Sterjov (2008) 166 FCR 415, cited
British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Laurie (2011) 242 CLR 283

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Parbery v QNI Metals Pty Ltd and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] QSC 249
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Parbery v QNI Metals Pty Ltd is a case where the applicant, Mr. Parbery, sought to disqualify Judge Jackson from hearing a proceeding on the grounds of apprehended bias. The dispute involved multiple defendants and was related to an earlier case where findings about the credit of the fourth defendant were made. The court was required to determine whether these findings created a reasonable apprehension of bias in Judge Jackson, who would be presiding over the upcoming trial.

The primary legal issue was whether the findings made in the previous case gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias such that a fair-minded lay observer might think the judge could not approach the credit of the fourth defendant impartially. The court also needed to consider whether other miscellaneous grounds presented a case of real doubt, warranting the judge's disqualification. The applicant argued that due to the previous findings, there was a real likelihood of bias, while the respondent maintained that no such bias existed.

The court found that the findings from the previous case did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias. It was noted that the judge had previously ruled on the credit of the fourth defendant and was aware that it would be an issue again. However, the court concluded that a fair-minded lay observer, informed of the facts, would not reasonably apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the credit of the fourth defendant. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for disqualification on all grounds except for the specific issue of the previous findings, where it was determined that Jackson J would not sit to hear the trial scheduled for 29 April 2019.

Orders

Orders of the court

The order of the court (on each of the applications) is that:

1. Jackson J will not sit to hear the trial of the proceeding set down to start on 29 April 2019.

2. Otherwise, the application is dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.