A trial judge's expression of preliminary views on issues, when made in the context of case management and explicitly qualified as being without the benefit of submissions, does not satisfy the test for apprehended bias. The fair-minded lay observer is unlikely to apprehend bias merely because a judge describes counsel's behaviour as 'disgraceful' or submissions as 'tendentious', unless such epithets are inapt to the extent of being unreasonable and indicative of an inability to bring an impartial mind to bear. While final reasons on substantive issues cannot remove an established apprehension of bias, the judgment on a recusal application may be considered on appeal, though with caution.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 39 later cases that cite this judgment.
12 of the 39 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.