Luck v Secretary, Department of Human Services (No 4) [2019] FCA 2071
None of the grounds raised by Ms Luck—namely, failure to make her requested orders, correspondence from chambers, prior determination of similar matters, or issues about the judge's appointment—could satisfy the test of apprehended bias as established in Ebner and subsequent authorities. A fair-minded lay observer would not apprehend bias in these circumstances.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 December 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Recusal in Appellate Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Recusal at Case Management Hearing
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['recusal of Judge' 'apprehended Bias' 'case Management' 'judicial Appointments']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Recusal in Appellate Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Recusal at Case Management Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend bias if the judge does not recuse themself' "Whether the judge's prior actions, correspondence, past case determinations, or appointment process support an apprehension of bias"]
Ratio Decidendi
None of the grounds raised by Ms Luck—namely, failure to make her requested orders, correspondence from chambers, prior determination of similar matters, or issues about the judge's appointment—could satisfy the test of apprehended bias as established in Ebner and subsequent authorities. A fair-minded lay observer would not apprehend bias in these circumstances.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- ['The application made by the appellant at the case management hearing on 6 December 2019 for the recusal of Justice Anderson is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment