Styles v Knox - [2024] NSWSC 1331

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Styles v Knox [2024] NSWSC 1331
Hearing dates: 19 September 2024
Date of orders: 22 October 2024
Decision date: 22 October 2024
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Schmidt AJ
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal is refused.
(2) Unless the parties approach to be heard within 7 days with short written submissions, Ms Styles is to bear Mr Knox's costs of this application for leave to appeal, as agreed or assessed.

Catchwords:
APPEALS — jurisdiction of appellate court — Supreme Court — whether refusal of a recusal application in the Local Court can be appealed to the Supreme Court — leave required — whether leave to appeal ought be granted — where claim is for small amount — where plaintiff has already had opportunity to raise bias on earlier appeal — leave refused
COURTS AND JUDGES — bias — application for recusal — recusal refused — application for leave to appeal from Magistrate’s decision not to recuse himself — where Magistrate had decided earlier proceedings between plaintiff and other parties — where plaintiff was unsuccessful in earlier proceedings — whether Magistrate displayed favouritism towards the legal representative of the defendants in earlier proceedings — whether fair-minded observer might reasonably apprehend bias

Legislation Cited:
Dividing Fences Act 1991 (NSW), ss 4, 11, 14
Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), ss 38, 39, 40, 45, 64
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 10.1

Cases Cited:
Cheng v Motor Yacht Sales Australia Pty Ltd t/as the Boutique Boat Company (2022) 108 NSWLR 342; [2022] NSWCA 118
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63
Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48
Lee v Chae-Sang Cha [2008] NSWCA 13
Rose v Tunstall [2018] NSWCA 241
Styles v Rowley [2023] NSWSC 1053

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Lynette Styles (Plaintiff)
Geoffrey Knox (First Defendant)
Local Court of New South Wales (Second Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff (self-represented)
First Defendant (self-represented)
Submitting appearance (Second Defendant)
Solicitors:
Kennedy & Cooke Lawyers (First Defendant)
Crown Solicitors Office (Second Defendant)

File Number(s): 2024/227250
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Ms Styles, a retired solicitor, brought these proceedings under ss39 or 40 of the Local Court Act 2007 (NSW) seeking leave, if that is required, and appealing the refusal of Dick LCM to disqualify himself from hearing a summons in proceedings which she has brought in the Local Court against a solicitor, Mr Knox: Styles v Knox (Local Court, Dick LCM, 3 June 2024, unrep).
Mr Knox had earlier represented Ms Styles’ neighbours, Ms Rowley and Mr Faulkner, in proceedings which she had pursued unsuccessfully against them in the Local Court: Styles v Rowley (Local Court, Dick LCM, 22 December 2022, unrep). Those proceedings concerned a dispute about a fencing application to which the Dividing Fences Act 1991 (NSW) applied. Ms Styles’ case resting on the claimed encroachment of a fence onto her property, its height and the absence of any development consent for its erection.
Ms…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Styles v Knox

Details

AGLC: Styles v Knox [2024] NSWSC 1331
Case: [2024] NSWSC 1331
Decision Date: 22 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Styles v Knox, the plaintiff sought to appeal the Local Court's refusal of a recusal application in the Supreme Court. The dispute involved allegations of bias against the Local Court Magistrate, who had previously presided over matters between the plaintiff and the defendants. The plaintiff claimed that the Magistrate displayed favouritism towards the defendants' legal representative and argued that this bias impacted the outcome of the earlier proceedings, which the plaintiff had unsuccessfully contested.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the Local Court's refusal of a recusal application and whether leave to appeal should be granted in light of the plaintiff's previous opportunity to raise the issue of bias on an earlier appeal. The court also needed to consider whether the small monetary claim at stake warranted an appeal and the potential implications of granting leave to appeal in such circumstances.

The court determined that the refusal of a recusal application in the Local Court was not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the court found that leave to appeal should not be granted, as the plaintiff had already had the opportunity to raise the issue of bias on an earlier appeal. The court concluded that there was no basis for a fair-minded observer to reasonably apprehend bias in the Magistrate's conduct. Consequently, the plaintiff's appeal was dismissed without the need for a hearing.

No specific orders were made in this case, as the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of jurisdiction and the refusal of leave to appeal. The court's decision effectively upheld the Local Court's refusal to recuse the Magistrate and maintained the earlier proceedings' outcomes.

Orders