Judge Andrew left his North Brisbane home early Sunday and drove in the direction of Mount Coot-tha, where he regularly takes a morning walk, police said Monday.

The judge’s car was found at 2pm on Dillon Road, The Gap. A ground search by police and SES volunteers began Sunday and continued Monday.

“Police and the man’s family hold concerns for his welfare,” Queensland police said in a statement.

Judge Andrew was transferred to the Brisbane registry and ordered to receive judicial training on appropriate behaviour in court after his conduct towards a lawyer for a father in a Family Court case was condemned by the Full Family Court as “cruel, insulting, humiliating and rude”.

A spokesperson for the Federal Circuit Court of Australia said on September 4 that Judge Andrew, who had served in the Townsville registry since his appointment to the bench in March last year, would also receive counselling, mentoring and have his sittings monitored.

A decision as to whether he would return to Townsville in the new year was expected before Christmas.

The appeals court ordered a custody and property battle to be reheard after finding that the “nature, intensity, frequency and content” of Judge Andrew’s remarks to the Queen’s Counsel and solicitor representing the father in the matter gave rise to an apprehension of bias and denied the father a fair trial.

“The nature, content and number of his Honour’s interruptions, criticisms and ad hominem attacks on Queen’s Counsel for the father, of themselves, drive the conclusion that the fair-minded observer might apprehend that the primary judge might not bring an impartial mind to the determination of the issues as they impacted the father’s case,” the appeals court said.

“Indeed, such a fair-minded observer might well think that his Honour bore significant animus towards Queen’s Counsel. Equally the primary judge’s treatment of the father’s solicitor, when he took over the conduct of the hearing, was hectoring, insulting, belittling, sarcastic and rude and that conduct too would, in our opinion, lead the impartial observer to the relevant apprehension.”

Judge Andrew made orders in the case in September last year, ruling that the parents of a seven-year-old child should have equal shared parental responsibility and that the child live with the mother in Brisbane.

Counsel for the father, Graeme Page QC, told the appeals court that from the outset of the three-day hearing in the case last year, Judge Andrew was critical, dismissive, sarcastic and rude to him, and that after Page withdrew the judge treated the father’s solicitor, Michael Dwyer, in the same way.

A barrister for the mother, Peter Baston, conceded that Judge Andrew’s comments could be perceived as “forceful”, “dogmatic” and “abrupt” but argued that they were directed at the barrister, and not at the father, and did not show any apprehended bias against the father.

The appeals court disagreed with Baston, saying the judge’s repeated remarks that the father was “swanning around” on the Gold Coast were dismissive, and that the interventions and comments directed at the father’s lawyers were enough to pass the apprehended bias test.

“The tone, nature and ferocity of his Honour’s comments could never be seen as justified, and in our view resulted in the father not receiving a fair trial and raised the identified apprehended bias, that no matter what the father’s case was as presented, it would be rejected.”

The appeals court found that Judge Andrew repeatedly questioned the honesty of Page without justification, including when the barrister attempted to explain the reason for his client’s absence from the court on the final day of trial.

Judge Andrew was also unduly critical of Page’s professionalism in the preparation and presentation of the case, and his dress and demeanour, the appeals court found. The judge repeatedly interrupted Page, made sarcastic remarks at his expense and, on one occasion, referred to the lawyer’s “performance” as “disgraceful”.

After Page withdrew on the third day, the judge continued his attacks on Dwyer, the appeals court found, including suggesting that the 60-year-old solicitor suffered from a “cognition problem”.

“The primary judge, by his conduct, squarely raised an apprehension of bias and failed to afford the father a fair trial. We feel bound to add here that the primary judge’s interventions, his cruel, insulting, humiliating and rude interactions with the father’s Queen’s Counsel and his solicitor, amounted to an abuse of the power of his position and, in our view must be redressed by allowing the appeal lest the integrity of the judicial system be undermined.”

Judge Andrew was appointed to the Federal Circuit Court to fill a vacancy left by the departure of Judge Steve Middleton.