DJ Singh v DH Singh and Others (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 31

DJ Singh v DH Singh and Others (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 31

The asserted misstatements in the stay judgment did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The fact that Mrs Singh and the deceased were never legally divorced was common ground on the appeals, the reference to the relief sought in the amended notice of appeal could not reasonably be taken as showing misunderstanding of that relief, and the applicant identified no logical connection between the alleged factual errors and the issues to be determined on the appeals that would cause a fair-minded lay person reasonably to apprehend that Gleeson JA might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the appeals.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Recusal in Appeals From Judgments and Orders of the Equity Division Concerning the Estate of the Late Douglas John Singh / Oral Recusal Application Made During the Hearing of Two Appeals; Reasons for Declining the Application
Outcome
Application for recusal declined
Legal Topics
['apprehended Bias' 'judicial Disqualification' 'apprehended Prejudgment' 'recusal Based on Alleged Misstatement of Facts in an Earlier Interlocutory Judgment']
['bias' 'civil Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['apprehended Bias' 'judicial Disqualification' 'apprehended Prejudgment' 'recusal Based on Alleged Misstatement of Facts in an Earlier Interlocutory Judgment']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Recusal in Appeals From Judgments and Orders of the Equity Division Concerning the Estate of the Late Douglas John Singh / Oral Recusal Application Made During the Hearing of Two Appeals; Reasons for Declining the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a fair-minded lay person with knowledge of the matters relied on by the applicant might reasonably consider that Gleeson JA might not carry out judicial functions with an impartial and unprejudiced mind.' 'Whether asserted factual errors in an earlier stay judgment created an apprehension of prejudgment requiring recusal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The asserted misstatements in the stay judgment did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The fact that Mrs Singh and the deceased were never legally divorced was common ground on the appeals, the reference to the relief sought in the amended notice of appeal could not reasonably be taken as showing misunderstanding of that relief, and the applicant identified no logical connection between the alleged factual errors and the issues to be determined on the appeals that would cause a fair-minded lay person reasonably to apprehend that Gleeson JA might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the appeals.

Court Disposition

Application for recusal declined

Orders

  • ['Application for recusal declined']