Simon Monteiro (Monterio) v Commissioner of Police

Simon Monteiro sought to have an extended supervision order varied or revoked to allow him to travel interstate. The Commissioner of Police opposed the application. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The court was required to decide if Monteiro's application should be dismissed because of an apprehended bias of the judge presiding over the case. The legal issue was whether the judge should be disqualified from further hearing the application because of the judge's prior involvement in Monteiro's criminal proceedings as a barrister.

The court considered whether the prior involvement of the judge in Monteiro's criminal proceedings could give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court noted that while opinions may differ as to the quality of a judge, this is not a ground for disqualifying a judge from a case. However, the court found that the judge's prior involvement in Monteiro's criminal proceedings as a barrister was sufficient to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court held that the judge should be disqualified from further hearing the application because the judge's prior involvement in the case may have influenced the judge's decision-making process. The court found that the application should be dismissed due to the apprehended bias of the judge.

The court ordered that Monteiro's application to vary or revoke the extended supervision order be dismissed. The court further ordered that the matter be remitted to the Registrar of the Court to be allocated to another judge for further hearing.