Ogawa v President, Australian Human Rights Commission [2023] FCA 940

Ogawa v President, Australian Human Rights Commission [2023] FCA 940

The applicant failed to establish an evidentiary basis for apprehended bias or any procedural unfairness; the interlocutory orders did not affect substantive rights and leave to appeal should be refused, particularly where allegations appropriate for decision by the primary judge had not been pursued below.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Determination
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['apprehended Bias' 'recusal Applications' 'leave to Appeal' 'case Management Orders' 'practice and Procedure']
['administrative Law' 'constitutional Law' 'human Rights Law'] ['apprehended Bias' 'recusal Applications' 'leave to Appeal' 'case Management Orders' 'practice and Procedure']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was apprehended bias on the part of the presiding judge' 'Whether interlocutory case management order justified leave to appeal' 'Whether allegations of bias justified recusal or appellate intervention']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish an evidentiary basis for apprehended bias or any procedural unfairness; the interlocutory orders did not affect substantive rights and leave to appeal should be refused, particularly where allegations appropriate for decision by the primary judge had not been pursued below.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.']