Day v Lerch & Ors

[2018] QCA 224

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Courts and Judges
2. › Disqualification for Interest or Bias
3. › Reasonable Apprehension of Bias
4. › Conduct of proceedings involving self-represented litigant
5. › Whether robust judicial intervention during protracted hearing gave rise to apprehended bias
6. › Whether fair-minded lay observer would consider context including litigant's conduct
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary Disposal
3. › Summary Judgment
4. › Factual disputes precluding summary determination
5. › Whether genuine factual dispute as to date of termination of employment precluded summary judgment
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 293
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary Disposal
3. › Summary Judgment
4. › Self-represented litigant
5. › Whether case should be determined on pleadings alone where self-represented litigant had expressed desire to run case on alternative basis
1. Workers' Compensation
2. › Preconditions to commencing proceedings
3. › Whether claimant was a 'worker' at date of alleged injury
4. › Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld)

Quick Take

When assessing apprehended bias arising from robust judicial conduct during hearings involving self-represented litigants, the fair-minded lay observer must be taken to be aware of the litigant's conduct as the counterpoint to the judge's responses. Summary judgment should not be granted where there is a genuine factual dispute material to the applicability of a statutory precondition to commencing proceedings, even where the dispute arises from inconsistencies in the respondent's own documents.