McCullough Robertson has been retained by the charity but also appeared against Mbuzi in a claim he brought against debt collector Collection House and St George Bank, during which Mbuzi alleged they “presented to have superior legal knowledge to me”.

“I verily believe that there is no lay-person (non-lawyer) who would hesitate to conclude apprehension of bias in circumstances where a judge’s previous law firm stood on the opposite side fighting a litigant over whom the judge must now pass judgment,” Mbuzi said.

“Additionally, that … judge’s side lost after boasting about its legal prowess, while denigrating the other side to have such inferior legal knowledge as to require the need for ‘seeking legal advice’.”

Because Mbuzi said he won the bank case, he suspected Justice Meagher “would be motivated to save face, and exact revenge for the losses her then-law firm suffered at my hands”.

Justice Meagher refused to recuse herself, and Mbuzi appealed this decision before Justice Mark Moshinsky on 10 grounds, including serious error of making an order, complicit in an alleged lie by an opposing side’s barrister, and wrong application for test of recusal.

Justice Moshinsky said the decision “is not attended with sufficient doubt to warrant its reconsideration on appeal”.

He objected to Mbuzi’s claim that Justice Meagher’s former position would mean she would be biased, particularly because “there is no suggestion that the primary judge was involved in the matter in which McCullough Robertson acted for the parties against Mbuzi”.

VIEW ALL

Mbuzi attempted to make something out of Justice Meagher hearing an administrative matter by one of McCullough Robertson’s lawyer at the outset of the hearing and before Mbuzi made his submissions.

Justice Moshinsky said the fact Justice Meagher received this administrative matter first “does not suggest any lack of impartiality”.