Wilson v SAS Trustee Corporation (No 2) [2021] NSWDC 840

Wilson v SAS Trustee Corporation (No 2) [2021] NSWDC 840

The application for disqualification is refused as there was no evidence that the judge had brought a biased attitude to the case, the judge's mind remained open, and the comments made during evidence did not support a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Parties
Plaintiff: Steven Wilson; Defendant: SAS Trustee Corporation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Judicial Disqualification
Outcome
Application for judicial disqualification refused
Legal Topics
Apprehended Bias, Judicial Disqualification, Police Compensation, Superannuation Entitlement
Civil Procedure Apprehended Bias Judicial Disqualification Police Compensation Superannuation Entitlement

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Wilson

Plaintiff

SAS Trustee Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Judicial Disqualification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge should disqualify himself for apprehended bias based on comments during evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The application for disqualification is refused as there was no evidence that the judge had brought a biased attitude to the case, the judge's mind remained open, and the comments made during evidence did not support a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial disqualification refused

Orders

  • Application for disqualification is refused.