Ascic, In the matter of an application for leave to issue a proceeding

[2015] HCATrans 305

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Perth No P46 of 2015

In the matter of ‑
an application by ANA ASCIC for leave to issue a proceeding

GORDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT MELBOURNE ON TUESDAY, 24 NOVEMBER 2015, AT 9.35 AM

HER HONOUR: This is an application for leave to issue an application for special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia given on 29 May 2015. On 16 September 2015, Justice Nettle directed that pursuant to rule 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth) the application for special leave was not to be issued or filed without leave of a Justice being obtained by the applicant. This is that application.

An affidavit filed by the applicant in support of the application for leave to issue states that the proposed application for special leave to appeal concerns a traffic offence of careless driving of which the applicant was convicted in the Armidale Magistrates Court on 28 February 2012. The special leave application annexed to the ex parte application seeking leave to issue it is headed “Exceptional Circumstances Application for Special Leave to appeal from a conviction obtained by fraud”. Ten appeal grounds are listed.

In the decision complained about the Court of Appeal (see Ascic v Bedworth [2015] WASCA 109) dismissed the applicant’s application for leave to file an appeal notice on the grounds, amongst others, that her application for leave to appeal to a single judge against conviction had been dismissed, her previous appeal to the Court of Appeal against that decision as well as an application for leave to extend time and adduce additional evidence in the appeal had been dismissed by the Court of Appeal (see Ascic v Bedworth [2013] WASCA 174) and the High Court had refused her application for special leave to appeal from that decision (see [2013] HCASL 200). As the Court of Appeal stated, a second appeal would have been beyond that court’s jurisdiction and incompetent.

The application for special leave to appeal against the second decision of the Court of Appeal ([2015] WASCA 109) raises no arguable ground of appeal. The “grounds” listed are, in fact, largely a recitation of the history of the matter from the applicant’s perspective and are unintelligible. The reasons of the Court of Appeal are comprehensive and obviously correct. In the result, the application which the applicant seeks to issue would be vexatious and oppressive and, accordingly, leave to issue the application should be refused.

The order of the Court is that the application for leave to issue the application for special leave is refused.

AT 9.38 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application by Ana Ascic to the High Court of Australia for leave to issue an application for special leave to appeal. The proposed appeal sought to challenge a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which had dismissed Ms. Ascic's application for leave to file an appeal notice. Ms. Ascic had been convicted of careless driving in the Armidale Magistrates Court in 2012, and her subsequent attempts to appeal that conviction through various courts had been unsuccessful.

The legal issue before the High Court was whether Ms. Ascic should be granted leave to issue her application for special leave to appeal. This required the Court to consider the merits of the proposed appeal and whether it raised any arguable grounds. The Court also had to determine if the proposed application was vexatious or oppressive, given the extensive history of litigation and prior refusals of appeals and special leave applications.

Her Honour observed that Ms. Ascic's proposed grounds of appeal were largely unintelligible and appeared to be a recitation of the procedural history from her perspective. The Court of Appeal's decision, which Ms. Ascic sought to appeal, was described as comprehensive and obviously correct. Considering the prior dismissals of appeals and special leave applications by the Court of Appeal and the High Court, and the lack of any arguable grounds in the proposed appeal, Her Honour concluded that the application to issue the special leave application would be vexatious and oppressive.

Accordingly, the application for leave to issue the application for special leave to appeal was refused.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established