Application of Michael Bar-Mordecai - [2013] NSWSC 1265

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Application of Michael Bar-Mordecai [2013] NSWSC 1265
Hearing dates: On the papers
Decision date: 05 September 2013
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Garling J
Decision:
(1) Application for leave to commence proceedings pursuant to s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008, contained in Order 2 of the Summons filed 8 August 2013, is dismissed.
(2) The Summons filed 8 August 2013 is otherwise dismissed.

Catchwords: PROCEDURE - Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 - Application for leave to institute proceedings - Ordinary Procedure - No prima facie basis disclosed - No matter of general principle
Legislation Cited: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) No.68a
Supreme Court Act 1970
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008
Cases Cited: Application by Michael Bar-Mordecai [2012] NSWSC 501
Attorney-General v Bar-Mordecai [2005] NSWSC 142
Bar-Mordecai - Application re Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 [2013] NSWSC 532
Bar-Mordecai v Attorney-General of NSW [2012] NSWSC 453
Bar-Mordecai v Health Care Complaints Commission [2002] NSWCA 192
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Michael Bar-Mordecai (A)
Representation: In person (A)

File Number(s): 2013/240727

Judgment - Application under Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008

The Application

On 8 August 2013, Michael Bar-Mordecai, filed a Summons in which he claims the following relief:

"1. Order that the Supreme Court register the Applicant as of right, and without an inquiry, on the grounds that he was unlawfully deregistered; or in the alternative,

2. An order that the Plaintiff be granted leave pursuant to the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 [VPA] to institute proceedings by way of lodging an application for review with the Executive Officer of the Medical Council being an application for review in the Medical Tribunal of NSW under s 163A of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) for the review of the unlawful non-tribunal decision of Cooper DCJ of 6 September 2000, where the Applicant's name was removed from the register by the unlawful orders of a lay judicial member of the Medical Tribunal, who surreptitiously and clandestinely usurped the decision making function of the two expert Medical Tribunal members.

3. An order that the final hearing be adjudicated and heard by a newly constituted Medical Tribunal of NSW, with an impartial judicial officer or no judicial officer having regard to the history of the matter and the plague of judicial corruption inherent in the Medical Tribunal of NSW, as identified by Elkaim DCJ of the Medical Tribunal of NSW with his orders dated 21.2.2013.

4. An order that the Medical Council of NSW not be joined as a party/contradictor in the Medical Tribunal litigation in terms of having relied on expert medical witnesses to advocate and give false and unfounded expert opinion evidence to mislead the Medical Tribunal of NSW.

5. Costs."

This is not the first application by Mr Bar-Mordecai with respect to his desire to commence proceedings against the Medical Council of NSW, or else one of its principal officers. There have been a number of previous applications.

In support of the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Application of Michael Bar-Mordecai and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2013] NSWSC 1265
Decision Date: 05 September 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved an application by Michael Bar-Mordecai seeking leave to institute proceedings under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008. The applicant, represented by himself, sought to initiate legal action against various entities and individuals, including the Prime Minister and other government officials. The application was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, where the court was required to determine whether there was a prima facie basis for the proposed proceedings and whether the case raised a matter of general principle.

The court needed to assess whether the applicant had disclosed a prima facie basis for his proposed legal action. This involved examining the merits of the claims and determining if there was sufficient evidence or legal argument to support the initiation of proceedings. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the case raised a matter of general principle that warranted judicial intervention, beyond the specific dispute between the parties.

The court found that the application did not disclose a prima facie basis for the proposed proceedings. The claims were largely speculative, and the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence or legal grounds to support his allegations. The court further concluded that the case did not raise a matter of general principle that would warrant judicial intervention. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for leave to institute proceedings, finding that there were no grounds to proceed under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008.

As a result of the court's decision, Michael Bar-Mordecai was not granted leave to institute the proposed legal action. The court's dismissal of the application effectively precluded the applicant from initiating proceedings against the named defendants based on the allegations presented. This decision underscores the importance of demonstrating a prima facie basis and the relevance of the case to broader legal principles when seeking leave to institute proceedings under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008.

Orders