ROBARDS & MILLER

The Family Court of Australia heard an application by the respondent mother seeking the disqualification of the presiding judge due to apprehended bias, the discharge of the family report writer, and the preparation of a new family report. The primary proceedings concerned parenting arrangements for the parties' eight-year-old child.

The court was required to determine whether there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the judge, such that a fair-minded lay observer would conclude that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the issues. Additionally, the court had to consider whether to discharge the family report writer and order a new report, particularly given that the proceedings were part-heard and the majority of the family report writer's evidence had already been concluded.

The judge applied the test for apprehended bias, which requires the court to consider whether a fair-minded lay observer, properly informed of all the circumstances, would apprehend that the judge might not bring an impartial mind to the issues. The court found that the mother's concerns did not meet this threshold, and the application for disqualification was dismissed. Regarding the family report, the court noted the significance of the proceedings being part-heard and the substantial evidence already presented by the family report writer. The court concluded that discharging the report writer and ordering a new report would not be in the best interests of the child and dismissed this part of the application as well.

The mother's application in a case was dismissed. The costs of the independent children's lawyer and the applicant father in relation to the application were reserved.