Yu v ACT Education Directorate

The applicant, a self-represented litigant, sought relief under the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth) concerning her dismissal from employment as a teacher by the respondent, the ACT Education Directorate. The applicant also filed an application for the recusal of the presiding Judge, alleging misquoted comments made during the trial. This application for recusal was brought approximately three months after the conclusion of a part-heard trial.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether there were sufficient grounds to warrant the recusal of the Judge. This required an assessment of the applicant's claims regarding the alleged misquoted comments and whether these, if established, would give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Judge Neville found that there was no factual or legal basis for the applicant's recusal application. The Court determined that the grounds claimed by the applicant were unsubstantiated and did not meet the threshold for recusal. Consequently, the application for recusal was dismissed. The costs of the respondent were reserved.