Mr Moses said it was time the federal government followed the lead of NSW and established a mechanism for dealing with judges who fall short of acceptable standards.

'Unacceptable'

"The Law Council is very troubled in relation to these recent decisions and is considering what steps it should take in order to ensure the public interest is protected and confidence in the administration of justice is not undermined," Mr Moses said.

"There is currently no independent mechanism to deal with complaints of conduct or competence against the federal judiciary. This is unacceptable in an age of transparency and accountability.

"Without commenting on the detail of these matters or on the particular judicial officer concerned, it is important to emphasise the Law Council's long-standing position that there should be a federal judicial commission to investigate matters concerning the conduct of a case and the manner in which a case is heard which cannot be completely addressed by an appeal court.

Law Council of Australia president Arthur Moses SC says the peak body for lawyers is 'very troubled in relation to these recent decisions' Supplied

"This is important for a number of reasons, including maintaining public confidence in the judiciary as well as to provide a judicial officer with the right to explain her or his conduct which may be the subject of complaint.

While both parties now support a national integrity commission to tackle corruption, they have been reluctant to back a body that would field complaints about judges for their judicial work.


'Attempt to bully'

Judge Vasta was appointed in 2015 by then attorney-general George Brandis after spending his entire legal career as a public prosecutor. Since then he has been overturned on appeal at least 15 times.

In the baptism case – Lysons v Lysons – the Family Court set aside Judge Vasta's order "that the child to be baptised as a Catholic if it is in the view of a priest that it is appropriate for the baptism to occur". The court added that a threat to jail one of the female same-sex parents for five years "might be seen as hyperbole, deployed in an attempt to bully the appellant into complying with the orders".

In the third case – Navarro v Navarro – the court said it was "apparent that not only detachment, but also composure, was lost".

The head of both the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, Chief Justice Will Alstergren, has declined to comment on whether Judge Vasta would be counselled or referred for remedial judicial training.