Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (No 3)

In the matter of Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (No 3), the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia reviewed a decision made by a single judge. The dispute between the parties centred on patent law and the interpretation of patent claims. The case involved an interlocutory application by GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd, challenging the judge's impartiality and seeking his disqualification from the case. The Full Court was required to decide whether the judge's conduct during the case warranted his disqualification on the grounds of apprehended bias.

The Full Court examined the principles of apprehended bias, focusing on whether the judge's comments during the hearing gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court concluded that the judge's questions during the hearing were intended for the purpose of testing and understanding the issues rather than indicating a predetermined view. The Full Court found that the judge's comments did not demonstrate any bias or partiality that would prevent a fair trial. Furthermore, the court held that GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd had waived its right to object to the judge's continued involvement in the case by not seeking a remittal to another judge after the Full Court ordered the matter to be remitted to the original judge.

The Full Court dismissed GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd's interlocutory application. The court held that the judge's assessment of the prima facie case for interlocutory relief was based on the principles established in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill and that the Full Court's reversal of the judge's assessment was also based on those principles. The Full Court determined that the judge's comments during the hearing did not demonstrate any bias or partiality that would prevent a fair trial. The orders of the Full Court included dismissing the interlocutory application, directing the respondent to pay the applicants' costs of the interlocutory application, and directing the applicants to pay the respondent's costs of a previous interlocutory application.