Doughty-Cowell (Victoria Police) v Kyriazis

[2018] VSCA 216

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Hearing rule
5. › Self-represented litigant
6. › Obligation to provide assistance
7. › Whether obligation affected by litigant's refusal to participate
8. › Whether litigant denied fair hearing
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Bias rule
5. › Apprehended bias
6. › Conduct of judicial officer
7. › Remarks made during hearing
8. › Whether fair-minded observer would reasonably apprehend bias
9. › Whether provocation by litigant relevant to assessment
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Procedural fairness
4. › Self-represented litigants
5. › Content of obligation to assist
6. › Assessment of litigant's capability and attitude
7. › Whether obligation varies with litigant's conduct
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Appeal from judicial review of County Court proceeding
4. › Court in as good a position as primary judge to assess demeanour from audio-visual recording
5. › Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118

Quick Take

A court's obligation to provide assistance to a self-represented litigant must be assessed in light of the litigant's own conduct, capabilities and attitude. Where a self-represented litigant deliberately refuses to participate in proceedings, the court is not obliged to take additional measures to provide assistance that the litigant has rejected. Judicial remarks expressing frustration or impatience, even if discourteous, do not establish apprehended bias when assessed in the context of extraordinary provocation by the litigant.