What is the test for reasonable apprehension of bias in an administrative review?

As for the specific complaint, it should be noted that the rule in issue is aimed at conduct which excites a reasonable apprehension of bias in a reasonable person. That is not to say though that the matter is entirely objective; it is not. Mullan, Administrative Law (2nd at p. 3-129) notes that: “... because allegations of bias have serious implications, the courts have generally rejected the argument that ‘mere’ (as opposed to ‘reasoned’) suspicion of bias is sufficient. Also, the courts look to the actual state of knowledge of the complainant and will deny relief if, on the facts as known, there could not be a reasonable apprehension of bias even though a person with less information might have entertained a reasonable apprehension.” (footnotes deleted and emphasis added) This notion is implicit, as well, in Rand, J’s, comments in Szilard v. Szasz, 1954 CanLII 4 (SCC), [1955] S.C.R. 3.