Reid v Hubbard (No 2) [2004] FCA 180

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Reid v Hubbard (No 2) [2004] FCA 180 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether costs should be awarded on indemnity basis and/or against legal practitioners personally – whether the Court can invoke O 62 r 9(1) Federal Court Rules of its own motion – sequence of submissions – application for disqualification on ground of apprehended bias – whether views expressed in judgment constitute bias by way of preconception – application of test in context of O 62 r 9(1)

Federal Court Rules O 62 r 9(1)

Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488 applied Shire of Gisborne v King [1995] 1 VR 103 at 106 followed Vakauta v Kelly (1989) 167 CLR 568 applied SUSAN REID & ANOR V JOHN HAROLD HUBBARD & ANOR (No 2) V 933 OF 2003 HEEREY J 26 FEBRUARY 2004 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 933 OF 2003

BETWEEN: SUSAN REID

FIRST APPLICANT

MICHAEL JAMES REID (by his litigation guardian SUSAN REID)

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: JOHN HAROLD HUBBARD

FIRST RESPONDENT

ESANDCEE PTY LTD (ACN 073 887 822)

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HEEREY J

DATE OF ORDER: 26 FEBRUARY 2004

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The motion filed on 24 February 2004 is dismissed 2. Submissions of the appellants and solicitors and counsel be filed and served by 9 March 2004, and those of the second respondent by 19 March 2004 3. Costs of the motion be costs in the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 933 OF 2003

BETWEEN: SUSAN REID

FIRST APPLICANT

MICHAEL JAMES REID (by his litigation guardian SUSAN REID)