Walton v Walton [2015] NSWSC 385

Walton v Walton [2015] NSWSC 385

The judge found that neither the terms of the judgment nor the remarks made during submissions could reasonably give rise to an apprehension of bias in the mind of a fair minded lay observer, and refused to recuse himself.

Parties
Plaintiff: Lynda Joyce Walton; First Defendant: Peter George Walton; Second Defendant: Helen Walton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Recusal Application / Ex Tempore Judgment at Hearing
Outcome
Recusal application dismissed
Legal Topics
Apprehension of Bias, Recusal of Judge, Costs
Practice and Procedure Apprehension of Bias Recusal of Judge Costs

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynda Joyce Walton

Plaintiff

Peter George Walton

First Defendant

Helen Walton

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Recusal Application / Ex Tempore Judgment at Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether judge should recuse himself due to apprehension of bias
  2. 2 Whether remarks during submissions or terms of judgment create reasonable apprehension of bias regarding costs

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found that neither the terms of the judgment nor the remarks made during submissions could reasonably give rise to an apprehension of bias in the mind of a fair minded lay observer, and refused to recuse himself.

Court Disposition

Recusal application dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's application for recusal is dismissed.
  • Plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs of this application.