A Christmas helping of apprehended bias from Judge Sal Vasta … More shouting, rudeness, anger, and overbearing conduct … Expense and delay as the case has to start again … Transcript … Judicial embarrassment … Sal’s sorry history 

In this neatly wrapped finding that the Circus Court judge was apprehendedly biased, the Full Feds – Andrew Greenwood, Anthony Besanko and John Reeves – sent back an application by a self-represented applicant who claimed that the Commonwealth Bank’s refusal to extend her a loan resulted in serious financial impairment. 

In true Salvatore style, with the expenditure of more money and time, the case has to start again before a different judge.  

Susan Dennis applied for a loan because she was without income while she looked after her ill pooch, an English setter named Hobson. 

Ms Dennis lived alone with a number of companion animals in a rural setting to the south of Brisbane. According to the judge who granted her leave to appeal from Sal’s dismissal:

“Her companion animals (two dogs and three horses) are her family. As she points out, she had and continues to have a legal obligation, as well as a moral obligation, to provide for their care.” 

Hobson, was diagnosed with hemangiosarcoma but was responding well to his treatment and the care. 

“However, the diagnosis of hemangiosarcoma was both unexpected and serious. According to Ms Dennis and the veterinary advice that she obtained, Hobson could not be left alone and required her constant care and attention. She was the only person available to provide that care.” 

The refusal of the loan and the bank’s conduct was the basis of her claim under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act for $750,000, repayment of interest charged to her account by the respondent and other forms of relief. 

Sal was in feisty form when her application came on before him in April last year. It was not clear to him the basis on which the claim was being made, and apparently this contributed to his agitation. 

While Ms Dennis was for the most part respectful, Salvatore was argumentative and overbearing. He interrupted her, talked over her, did not let her finish making her submissions, raised his voice and belittled her arguments. 

Selections from the transcript once more show Sal’s trademark judicial style – a style that has seen him nominated for “worst judge in Australia“. 

[snip]

[snip]

[snip] 

[snip]

[snip]

The full court observed that the statement by the primary judge that the appellant should not talk over him again, is delivered in an enraged and intimidating tone of voice with Vasta shouting at the appellant.

It wasn’t hard to reach the view that “a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the primary judge might not have brought an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the resolution of the [bank’s] application for summary dismissal”. 

“Having regard to all the circumstances, and we stress, all the circumstances, we conclude that a case of apprehended bias has been established.” 

Dennis v Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Salvatore has form when it comes to unrepresented litigants – see, Vasta Watch. In the Gambaro case there was more bullying, overbearing and threatening conduct from the judge – see, Shutuppa ya face. 

In Salutations, we rummaged though recent history to report instances of Sal’s bombast, bullying, contempt, errors of law – so much so that the mentors were called in. 

And don’t forget Stradford v Stradford and Navarro v Navarro – see, Salutary lesson.  

In Huda, a family law property case, there were too many questions from the bench, expressions of disbelief, sarcasm and dollops of procedural unfairness – see, Into the fray. 

There were other reports here – see, Sal sitting on the sorry stool. 

All of this makes it quite extraordinary that attorney general Porter was considering Vasta for appointment to the Family Court and that Two Wigs Willy made him acting chief judge of the Circus Court and national case management judge – a treat for someone who can’t manage his own cases.