Lawrance v President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal [2005] FCA 642

Lawrance v President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal [2005] FCA 642

There was no foundation for the applicant's assertions of bias or apprehension of bias, no evidence of improper communications, and no error in principle or law by the primary judge; therefore, there was no sufficient doubt or potential for substantial injustice to warrant leave to appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Aroha Lawrance; First Respondent: President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Second Respondent: Senior Member Kelly of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Third Respondent: Senior Member Allen of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Fourth Respondent: Bev Smith
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Application for Leave to Appeal, Disqualification of Judge, Bias, Apprehension of Bias
Courts and Judicial System Application for Leave to Appeal Disqualification of Judge Bias Apprehension of Bias

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aroha Lawrance

Applicant

President, Administrative Appeals Tribunal

First Respondent

Senior Member Kelly of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Senior Member Allen of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Third Respondent

Bev Smith

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether alleged bias or apprehension of bias by a judge warranted disqualification and leave to appeal
  2. 2 Whether sufficient doubt and risk of substantial injustice existed to grant leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

There was no foundation for the applicant's assertions of bias or apprehension of bias, no evidence of improper communications, and no error in principle or law by the primary judge; therefore, there was no sufficient doubt or potential for substantial injustice to warrant leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.