Ex Parte Lewin; In re Ward: 1946

(Australia – New South Wales) The court heard an an application for a rule nisi for a writ of statutory prohibition directed to a magistrate in proceedings by a landlord for the recovery of premises. The magistrate had already heard and determined a similar application between the landlord and a different tenant, which involved consideration of evidence of a witness also proposed to be called in the proceedings in issue. The magistrate had not done or said anything which in fact indicated that he would not determine the proceedings on the merits.
Held: McClemens J discharged the rule nisi. After dealing with the question of apprehended or ostensible bias in the particular circumstances, he went on to reject a finding urged upon him of real bias, adding: ‘No judicial officer has a vested interest in any one of his decisions, and if the circumstances arise where it is proper that he has to reconsider it, he should do so, and if he thinks it wrong, say so.’
McClemens J
[1964] NSWR 446, 80 WN (NSW) 1527
Cited by:
ApprovedLivesey v New South Wales Bar Association 20-May-1983
High Court of Australia – Courts and Judges – Bias – Prejudgment of issues and of credibility of witness – Refusal to withdraw.
The defendant barrister resisted an application to strike his name off the roll. B, at the time a law student and . .
(1983) 151 CLR 288, (1983) 47 ALR 45, (1983) 57 ALJR 420
CitedOtkritie International Investment Management and Others v Urumov CA 14-Oct-2014
The claimants brought proceedings against several defendants. There had been a series of hearings conducted by a single judge leading to findings that several defendants had been involved in a fraud. The defendants sought recusal of that judge . .
[2014] EWCA Civ 1315

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.537710