Beverley Georgina Viavattene v Attorney General in and for the State of New South Wales

[2014] NSWSC 23

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Beverley Georgina Viavattene v Attorney General in and for the State of New South Wales [2014] NSWSC 23
Hearing dates:	14 January 2014
Decision date:	14 January 2014
Jurisdiction:	Equity Division
Before:	Lindsay J
Decision:	Order that the oral application be dismissed
Catchwords:	Vexatious litigant - Application for Leave
Legislation Cited:	Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 NSW
Cases Cited:	Attorney-General in and for the State of New South Wales v Viavattene [2013] NSWSC 453. Viavattene, Beverley Georgina [2013] NSWSC 1765
Category:	Interlocutory applications
Parties:	Beverley Georgina Viavattene (Plaintiff (Ex Parte))
Representation:	Counsel: Solicitors:
File Number(s):	2012/00169892

Judgment (Ex parte)

1. On 3 May 2013 Fullerton J made orders pursuant to s8(7) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 NSW against Beverley Georgina Viavattene.

1. Those orders were to the effect that Ms Viavattene be prohibited from instituting proceedings in New South Wales other than with leave of the appropriate Court under the Vexatious Proceedings Act, and that any legal proceedings instituted by her in any court or tribunal in New South Wales before the date of her Honour's order be stayed.

1. Her Honour's reasons for judgment have been published as Attorney-General in and for the State of New South Wales v Viavattene [2013] NSWSC 453.

1. Subsequent proceedings involving Ms Viavattene include proceedings that culminated in the publication by Harrison J, on 28 November 2013, of reasons for judgment styled Viavattene, Beverley Georgina [2013] NSWSC 1765.

1. Ms Viavattene has today made an ex parte application to me, as the Equity Vacation Judge, for orders that appear to be sought by reference to s14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act: She seeks leave to proceed with various applications in, or referable to proceedings in, the Local Court. She also seeks an order that there be a waiver of fees payable to the Supreme Court in respect of issue of a summons (embodying applications for leave to institute proceedings) in which the Attorney-General and various police officers, or so it seems, are named as respondents.

1. The form of the material provided to me does not permit me to make a confident judgement about precisely what relief is sought.

1. I find myself in a position not dissimilar to that described by Harrison J in para 12 of his reasons for judgment. He there remarked upon his difficulty in making any sense of the application that had been made to him.

1. There is some element of clarity in the present application insofar as Ms Viavattene evidently seeks leave to pursue an appeal to the District Court from orders made against her by the Local Court at Murwillumbah on 18 December 2013. However, the materials that have been provided to me (coupled with her explanation) do not permit me, even in relation to those orders, to know with any confidence precisely what Ms Viavattene hopes to achieve.

1. She evidently had a grant of Legal Aid to appear before the Murwillumbah Local Court on 18 December 2013 but she was unable, in the ultimate event, to obtain any representation by a local solicitor. She informs me that she appeared in person before the Court on that occasion and, notwithstanding her submissions, a range of orders were made against her.

1. The orders that she tells me were made against her are not clear to me, although she has provided me with a copy of two forms of notice of penalty dated 18 December 2013 which suggest that she was, at least, ordered to pay costs and a victims support levy in each of two matters (case number 2013/00161424 and case number 2013/00195152). The amounts that she was ordered to pay, according to those notices, total $780.

1. The submissions made by Ms Viavattene today appear to have traversed much the same ground as was traversed by her in the application she made to Harrison J, which application he dismissed pursuant to s15 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act.

1. I have no material that enables me to make an independent assessment of the precise nature, and merits, of the proceedings Ms Viavattene presently seeks to pursue.

1. In those circumstances, I am bound to make an order similar to the order made by Harrison J, that the oral application made to me be dismissed.

1. Accordingly, pursuant to of the Vexatious Proceedings Act, I order that the application today made by Ms Viavattene orally for leave to commence proceedings be dismissed.

1. In the nature of an application for leave to institute proceedings, dismissal of today's application does not, of itself, preclude Ms Viavattene from making an application for leave in a form that permits an adjudication of it, perhaps, with greater confidence than I have been able to approach her present application.

1. I have entertained this application without any need, so it seems to me, to receive formal documentation (in the form of a summons or other originating process) likely to attract a requirement for the payment of fees in the court registry. I will however deliver to the registry for safekeeping, and in case they be needed in any other context, the papers that have been provided to me by Ms Viavattene.

**********

Decision last updated: 04 February 2014