Ahern v Brisbane City Council

Ahern v Brisbane City Council involved the plaintiff, Mr Ahern, who brought two applications, one in 2003 and another in 2022, seeking materially identical relief against the Brisbane City Council. The defendant sought orders to strike out the proceeding on the basis that it was vexatious and an abuse of process. The court had to decide whether the proceeding should be struck out on the basis that it was vexatious or an abuse of process and whether the proceedings should be stayed pursuant to rule 367.

The court found that Mr Ahern's pleadings were inadequate in several respects. He had not properly pleaded or particularised his allegation that "adequate" compensation should be calculated and paid. Additionally, his response to a request for particulars was perfunctory and inappropriate. The court held that Mr Ahern should provide further and better particulars to the defendant. The court also found that the proceeding should be dismissed due to procedural irregularities. The court decided to grant limited success to the defendant in that it would only have to deal with one proceeding. However, the court considered that this was more due to the state of the two proceedings rather than anything the defendant had done.

The court ordered the dismissal of the 2003 proceeding, with the order taking effect one week from the date of judgment. The plaintiff was to pay the costs reserved by orders 3 and 4 of the orders of Williams J made on 16 November 2022 in the 2003 proceeding. The plaintiff was also required to give further and better particulars of the allegations pleaded in certain paragraphs of the statement of claim. The defendant's costs in this proceeding were to be the costs of an incidental to this application, but the parties were granted leave to propose an alternative costs order by way of written submission.