GAR v Attorney General of New South Wales and Supreme Court of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 47

GAR v Attorney General of New South Wales and Supreme Court of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 47

GAR failed to identify any facts that would cause a fair-minded observer to reasonably apprehend that any, let alone all, judges of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal would not bring an impartial and independent mind to the determination of his application. His allegations amounted to bare assertions and challenges to the correctness of judicial decisions, insufficient to establish apprehended bias. There was no evidence to support his claims of judicial conspiracy or document tampering. Even were the apprehended bias principle otherwise engaged, the principle of necessity would apply to ensure the court can carry out its statutory functions.

Parties
Applicant: GAR; First Respondent: Attorney General of New South Wales; Second Respondent: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Motion (disqualification of Judges) / Court of Appeal Decision on Motion to Disqualify All Judges
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Apprehended Bias, Disqualification of Judges, Natural Justice, Judicial Independence, Institutional Impartiality, Review of Criminal Conviction
Administrative Law Criminal Law Judicial Review Apprehended Bias Disqualification of Judges Natural Justice Judicial Independence Institutional Impartiality +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 38 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GAR

Applicant

Attorney General of New South Wales

First Respondent

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Motion (disqualification of Judges) / Court of Appeal Decision on Motion to Disqualify All Judges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a fair-minded observer might reasonably apprehend that all judges of the Supreme Court of New South Wales are biased and could not hear the applicant's judicial review application impartially
  2. 2 Whether principles of necessity apply in circumstances where all judges may be disqualified
  3. 3 Whether allegations of judicial conspiracy, removal of documents, and adverse findings in prior proceedings provide a reasonable basis for disqualification

Ratio Decidendi

GAR failed to identify any facts that would cause a fair-minded observer to reasonably apprehend that any, let alone all, judges of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal would not bring an impartial and independent mind to the determination of his application. His allegations amounted to bare assertions and challenges to the correctness of judicial decisions, insufficient to establish apprehended bias. There was no evidence to support his claims of judicial conspiracy or document tampering. Even were the apprehended bias principle otherwise engaged, the principle of necessity would apply to ensure the court can carry out its statutory functions.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • GAR's motion seeking disqualification of all judges of the Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeal is dismissed.