R v Tarrant [2016] NSWSC 892
The judge's conduct during the Roff trial and the Tarrant trial, including questioning the applicant and handling counsel's language, does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias or actual bias. Proper legal principles were followed, and no pre-judgment of issues in the sentencing proceedings was found. The application for recusal is dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 28 June 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Recusal Application During Sentencing Proceedings
- Outcome
- Application for the judge's recusal is dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['apprehended Bias' 'recusal of Judge' 'fair Trial' 'sentencing' 'judicial Questioning' 'actual Bias']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Recusal Application During Sentencing Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a judge should recuse himself from sentencing proceedings due to apprehended bias' 'Whether the conduct of the judge in questioning the applicant as a witness and handling proceedings creates a reasonable apprehension of bias' 'Whether actual bias was demonstrated']
Ratio Decidendi
The judge's conduct during the Roff trial and the Tarrant trial, including questioning the applicant and handling counsel's language, does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias or actual bias. Proper legal principles were followed, and no pre-judgment of issues in the sentencing proceedings was found. The application for recusal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application for the judge's recusal is dismissed.
Orders
- ['The application that Fagan J recuse himself from further hearing of sentence proceedings in respect of Sarah Tarrant following upon her conviction of manslaughter on 14 May 2016 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