Second judge recuses himself from Clive Palmer case

The second judge to recuse himself from overseeing a Clive Palmer trial has taken aim at the mining magnate.

Businessman Clive Palmer leaves the Supreme Court in Brisbane. Picture: AAP.

The second judge to recuse himself from overseeing a mountainous civil trial involving Clive Palmer and the liquidators of Queensland Nickel has taken aim at the mining magnate for “scandalising conduct”.

It comes less than two months after judge John Bond stood aside after Mr Palmer argued there could be perceived biased against him. Two weeks ago, Mr Palmer and his co-defendants applied to also have his replacement, Supreme Court judge David Jackson, ­recused. Delivering his judgment in Brisbane yesterday, Justice Jackson said he would not oversee the trial — scheduled to start in April and continue for 12 weeks — because of apprehended bias but would continue to handle hearings in the interim.

Liquidators are seeking to recover $300 million owed to Queensland Nickel’s creditors after the north Queensland business collapsed in 2016, costing 800 people their jobs.

Justice Jackson rejected eight of the reasons put forward as to why he should recuse himself, but agreed there could be reasonable apprehension of bias because of his rulings in a previous case involving Mr Palmer.

In the 2015 case between Mr Palmer and Sino Iron, Justice Jackson made comments that ­reflected on Mr Palmer’s “credit” as a witness. He said Mr Palmer’s credit would be relevant when evidence about a “green notebook”, which Mr Palmer has described as a minute book for meetings, is discussed at trial.

“In particular, they rely on the issue in the present proceeding as to whether the fourth defendant (Mr Palmer) fabricated evidence described as the ‘green notebook’,” Justice Jackson said. “It is common ground that the fourth ­defendant’s credit and credibility will be challenged at the trial, if he gives evidence.”

Justice Jackson said the liquidators also intended to question Mr Palmer’s credibility “in relation to his knowledge as to whether QNI was insolvent or likely to be insolvent”. The judge criticised the bulk of Mr Palmer’s application and ­accused the former federal MP of “scandalising conduct”.

He said one allegation raised by Mr Palmer “may have been intended to embarrass (the judge) personally” and Mr Palmer had abused his status as a self-­represented litigant to get away with making unsubstantiated claims a practising lawyer would not.

Mr Palmer had claimed an ­informant had told him Justice Jackson had spoken “unfavour­ably” about him to barristers and solicitors but offered no evidence.

He blamed bias against him on “fake news” and said he was concerned he would not get a fair hearing. “It is extremely disturbing that two judges have been recused for being biased against me,” he said.