BANNISTER v WALTON [1996] NSWCA 40

BANNISTER v WALTON [1996] NSWCA 40

Given the allegations of bias against the Medical Tribunal and the resulting financial hardship to the claimant, the matter is entitled to significant expedition and evidentiary directions are issued to clarify the scope of factual contest.

Parties
Claimant: John Herbert Bannister; Opponent: Walton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Expedition of Proceedings / Interlocutory Directions Hearing
Outcome
Directions hearing; evidentiary timetable and procedural orders issued
Legal Topics
Bias in Tribunal Decision, Expedition of Proceedings
Administrative Law Judicial Review Bias in Tribunal Decision Expedition of Proceedings

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Herbert Bannister

Claimant

Walton

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Application for Expedition of Proceedings / Interlocutory Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a reasonable apprehension of bias affecting the Medical Tribunal decision
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings ought to be expedited

Ratio Decidendi

Given the allegations of bias against the Medical Tribunal and the resulting financial hardship to the claimant, the matter is entitled to significant expedition and evidentiary directions are issued to clarify the scope of factual contest.

Court Disposition

Directions hearing; evidentiary timetable and procedural orders issued

Orders

  • Dr Mario Benanzio to swear affidavit regarding conversation with Dr James Ellis, to be filed and served by 4pm Wednesday.
  • Any other claimant affidavit to be filed and served by 4pm Tuesday, 12 March 1996.