Parbery v QNI Metals Pty Ltd

In Parbery v QNI Metals Pty Ltd, the defendants sought the disqualification of Bond J on the basis of apprehended bias due to prejudgment. The defendants argued that Bond J had already made an assessment of the credibility of the fourth defendant's evidence in a previous interlocutory application, and that this assessment would likely be relevant to the trial of the proceeding. The defendants submitted that a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that Bond J might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the determination of issues at the trial. The self-represented fourth defendant also contended that Bond J was actually biased against him and had failed to provide him with the requisite assistance or consideration.

The court considered whether there was any basis for a finding of actual bias, noting that the fourth defendant had not provided evidence to support his contentions. The court also considered whether there was a relevant risk of apprehended bias, and whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that Bond J might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the determination of issues at the trial. The court found that there was a relevant risk of apprehended bias, and that a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that Bond J might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the determination of issues at the trial.

Accordingly, the court ordered that Bond J be recused from hearing the trial of the proceeding, and that Jackson J be the Commercial List judge responsible for the management of the proceeding. The court also varied certain orders to reflect the change in judge. The court did not find any basis for a finding of actual bias.