Leedman v Chahhoud [2024] NSWSC 1566

Leedman v Chahhoud [2024] NSWSC 1566

The matters articulated by Ms Chahhoud do not demonstrate actual bias nor give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. There was no logical connection between previous evidentiary or credibility determinations and the factual or legal merits of the pending motion. Findings in prior proceedings, adverse to a party, absent specific logical linkage, do not require recusal for ancillary determinations.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Kim Leedman; Second Plaintiff: Anita Leedman; Third Plaintiff: Trilam Developments Pty Ltd (ACN 130 367 412); First Defendant: Chadia Chahhoud; Second Defendant: Elias Taleb; Third Defendant: Fawaz Helou; Fourth Defendant: Ozem Kassem in his capacity as liquidator of Class 1 Form Pty Ltd (In liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Recusal / Application for Recusal Determination
Outcome
Application for recusal dismissed
Legal Topics
Recusal, Actual or Apprehended Bias, Judicial Impartiality
Civil Procedure Recusal Actual or Apprehended Bias Judicial Impartiality

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kim Leedman

First Plaintiff

Anita Leedman

Second Plaintiff

Trilam Developments Pty Ltd (ACN 130 367 412)

Third Plaintiff

Chadia Chahhoud

First Defendant

Elias Taleb

Second Defendant

Fawaz Helou

Third Defendant

Ozem Kassem in his capacity as liquidator of Class 1 Form Pty Ltd (In liquidation)

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion for Recusal / Application for Recusal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge should be recused from determining the plaintiffs' notice of motion on grounds of actual bias or reasonable apprehension of bias

Ratio Decidendi

The matters articulated by Ms Chahhoud do not demonstrate actual bias nor give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. There was no logical connection between previous evidentiary or credibility determinations and the factual or legal merits of the pending motion. Findings in prior proceedings, adverse to a party, absent specific logical linkage, do not require recusal for ancillary determinations.

Court Disposition

Application for recusal dismissed

Orders

  • The first defendant's application for Justice Williams to disqualify herself from hearing and determining the plaintiffs' notice of motion filed on 27 November 2024 on the grounds of actual bias or reasonable apprehension of bias is dismissed.