DJC v Burg & Magistrates' Court of Victoria

[1998] VSCA 139

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Courts and Judges
2. › Bias
3. › Apprehended bias
4. › Family connection between judicial officer and party or witness
5. › Tenuous connection by marriage
6. › Whether mere attendance at wedding of relatives five years earlier gave rise to reasonable apprehension of bias
7. › Whether absence of evidence of personal acquaintance or social contact was decisive
1. Courts and Judges
2. › Bias
3. › Apprehended bias
4. › Judicial comments during proceedings
5. › Magistrate's commendation of complainant witnesses after guilty plea
6. › Whether comments combined with family connection gave rise to reasonable apprehension of bias
1. Courts and Judges
2. › Bias
3. › Apprehended bias
4. › Disqualifying family connections
5. › Degrees of connection
6. › Whether closeness of tie and personal nature of connection determine whether mere existence of family connection disqualifies
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Certiorari
3. › Discretion to refuse relief
4. › Availability of alternative remedy
5. › De novo appeal to County Court
6. › Whether availability of hearing de novo justified refusal of certiorari

Quick Take

A tenuous family connection by marriage — such as the marriage of a magistrate's nephew to a party's niece — without evidence of personal acquaintance or social contact, does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, even when combined with commendatory remarks about complainant witnesses made after a guilty plea. The closer the family tie and the more personal the connection, the more likely a reasonable apprehension of bias will arise; but cases where the mere existence of the connection disqualifies will be rare.