NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Bakarich v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2010] NSWCA 43
HEARING DATE(S): 26 March 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 1 April 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Campbell JA at 1
DECISION: Application to recuse refused
CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE – courts and judges generally – judges – appellant seeking disqualification for apprehended interest or bias – request for judge to disqualify self on basis of apprehended bias – what amount of relevant knowledge is to be attributed to the "fair-minded lay-observer" – question of apprehended bias in context of judges and lawyers operating as part of a shared profession – judge's prior associations with litigant and that litigant's barristers held insufficient to warrant self-exclusion
CATEGORY: Procedural and other rulings
Bainton v Rajski (1992) 29 NSWLR 539 Bakarich v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2004] NSWSC 283 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337 Laws v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (1990) 170 CLR 70 CASES CITED: Raybos Australia Pty Ltd v Tectran Corporation Pty Ltd (1986) 6 NSWLR 272 Re Renaud; ex parte CJL (1986) 60 ALJR 528 R v Judge Russell; ex parte Reid (1984) 35 SASR 417 Re Polites; Ex parte Hoyts Corporation Pty Ltd (1991) 173 CLR 78 Vakauta v Kelly (1989) 167 CLR 568
PARTIES: Allan John Bakarich (Applicant) Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 2005/270113
COUNSEL: D Quinn, solicitor (Applicant) T Bathurst QC; DFC Thomas (Respondent)
SOLICITORS: Quinn & Quinn (Applicant) In House counsel (Respondent)
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