McKenzie v Cash Converters International Ltd (No 3) [2019] FCA 10

McKenzie v Cash Converters International Ltd (No 3) [2019] FCA 10

Given the protective and supervisory nature of the settlement approval jurisdiction under s 33V, the absence of direct involvement in this proceeding, the difference in material and parties, and the requirements of judicial impartiality, there is no reasonable apprehension that the judge might determine the application otherwise than on its merits. The application for disqualification is dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Decision on Application for Disqualification of Judge (apprehended Bias) Prior to Settlement Approval Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory application for disqualification dismissed
Legal Topics
['apprehended Bias' 'disqualification of Judge' 'class Actions' 'settlement Approval Under S 33 V of Federal Court of Australia Act 1976' 'procedure for Raising Apprehended Bias']
['practice and Procedure'] ['apprehended Bias' 'disqualification of Judge' 'class Actions' 'settlement Approval Under S 33 V of Federal Court of Australia Act 1976' 'procedure for Raising Apprehended 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Decision on Application for Disqualification of Judge (apprehended Bias) Prior to Settlement Approval Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the judge should disqualify himself from hearing a class action settlement approval application under s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) due to apprehended bias']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the protective and supervisory nature of the settlement approval jurisdiction under s 33V, the absence of direct involvement in this proceeding, the difference in material and parties, and the requirements of judicial impartiality, there is no reasonable apprehension that the judge might determine the application otherwise than on its merits. The application for disqualification is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application for disqualification dismissed

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application filed by the respondent on 3 December 2018 be dismissed.' 'Any issue as to the costs of the interlocutory application filed by the respondent on 3 December 2018 be determined on 31 January 2019.']