Valdez & Frazier (No 2)

Valdez & Frazier (No 2) involved an appeal against multiple family law decisions, including a contravention application, recusal application, and various applications in the appeal. The appellant, Valdez, sought to overturn several orders made by the primary judge, Frazier. The central issue was whether the primary judge's interpretation of the final orders alleged to have been contravened was correct, and whether the primary judge erred in dismissing the recusal application. The appellant also made several applications in the appeal, including a request to adjourn the hearing due to the respondent's failure to file submissions, an application to adduce further evidence, and a request to transfer the proceedings to another court.

The court found that the primary judge's interpretation of the final orders was open to him, and the appellant had not established that the primary judge's articulation of law and principle was incorrect. Regarding the recusal application, the court determined that the test for apprehended bias was not satisfied, and the primary judge's decision was correct. The court dismissed the various applications in the appeal, including the adjournment application, the application to adduce further evidence, and the application to transfer the proceedings to another court. The court also dismissed the application for the recusal of the appeal bench, finding that the test for apprehended bias was not satisfied.

In light of the wholly unsuccessful appeal, the court ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeals and the applications in the appeal on a party/party basis. The court also dismissed the appellant's application to file an application seeking the transfer of the proceedings to the Federal Court or Supreme Court, finding that the application was an attempt to re-litigate a matter already determined. The court dismissed the amended application in an appeal, and the appeal filed on 11 March 2016 and 22 March 2016. The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court's records.