Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Hillier v Martin (No 20) [2023] FCA 1686 File number(s): SAD 113 of 2020
Judgment of: O'SULLIVAN J
Date of judgment: 18 October 2023
Date of publication of reasons: 3 May 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Request in affidavit filed by first respondent on 18 October 2023 to vacate hearing date — contention in the affidavit that judge should recuse himself — no appearance at the hearing by the first respondent — whether fair minded observer might reasonably apprehend that judge might not bring an impartial mind to the hearing of proceeding — whether logical connection is established — request to vacate hearing refused — contention judge should recuse himself declined
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 35A(7)(b), 37N(1)
Division: General Division
Registry: South Australia
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance
Number of paragraphs: 26
Dates of hearings: 18 October 2023
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr R Whitington KC with Ms H Doyle
Solicitor for the Applicant: Sykes Bidstrup
Counsel for the First and Second Respondents: No appearance
Counsel for the Third Respondent: No appearance
Counsel for the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents: Mr D Blight KC with Mr T Kentish
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate