Glew v Frank Jasper Pty Ltd

[2012] WASCA 93

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Appeal
3. › Grounds of appeal
4. › Whether grounds have reasonable prospect of success
5. › Power to dismiss appeal
6. › Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 43(2)(g)(i)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Bias
3. › Apprehended bias
4. › Trial judge previously briefed as counsel by solicitors for a party
5. › Whether fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend bias
6. › Unrelated matter 10 years earlier
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Abuse of process
3. › Persistent re-agitation of arguments previously decided against litigant
4. › Warning as to indemnity costs

Quick Take

The fact that a trial judge was briefed as counsel by the same firm of solicitors acting for a party, in an unrelated matter approximately 10 years before the trial, does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. Persistent re-agitation of arguments already decided against a litigant constitutes abuse of process and may attract indemnity costs orders.