Acting Justice Philip Storr was right not to withdraw from a matrimonial case following claims he might be biased, the Court of Appeal has found.

But the judges found that appellant Nicholas Snelling's conduct was calculated to embarrass Mr. Justice Storr to remove him from the case.

Mr. Snelling appealed against Mr. Justice Storr's refusal to recuse ? or withdraw ? from a matrimonial dispute with his former wife Julia.

Mr. Snelling took a second legal opinion ? without informing his attorney Kim Wilson ? with lawyer Rachel Cabot of Cox Hallett Wilkinson.

Mr. Justice Storr is a consultant at Cox Hallett Wilkinson when not sitting as a judge, and Mr. Snelling claimed the judge might have a direct professional connection with the case leading to a perception of bias.

And he also alleged that comments made by the judge in Chambers indicated he had prejudged the case.

The judges rejected both claims from Mr. Snelling, saying a fair minded observer would not find there was a possibility of bias because Ms Cabot had offered an opinion.

And they said two independent sources heard the comments in Chambers and there was no possibility Mr. Justice Storr had prejudged the case.

But they had some harsh criticism for the way Mr. Snelling behaved in the matter and rejected his appeal.

"The conduct of the appellant (Mr. Snelling) has been characterised in correspondence from the respondent's (the former Mrs. Snelling) attorneys as a deliberate attempt to bring about the judge's recusal on fabricated grounds so as to hopefully secure the assignment of a more sympathetic tribunal," the Court of Appeal judges wrote in their ruling.

"The appellant has denied in affidavit any such intention on his part and it is unnecessary, and probably impossible, for this court to reach a concluded decision upon it.

"His choice of Ms Cabot, a junior counsel in a different firm to render this advice (second opinion) is curious since she is not alleged to have any expertise in this area.

"It may also be significant that the choice of Ms Cabot was apparently reached in consultation with the appellant's girlfriend, who is herself an attorney in practice at the Bermuda Bar who would have known that Mr. Storr was associated with the firm employing Ms Cabot.

"Instructions were given to Ms Cabot without informing Ms Wilson, his attorney of record. The appellant's explanation, that Ms Wilson might have felt insulted, is suspiciously lame.

"No suggestion fell from the appellant to Ms Cabot that a possible conflict might arise from the judge's connection with Cox Hallett Wilkinson, although the real possibility that Mr. Storr might be assigned to hear the matter must surely have been present in the appellant's mind.

"We conclude that the appellant's conduct was calculated, even if not intended, to bring about embarrassment to the learned judge, which might have led to his recusal of himself from the case."