Bhatia v State of New South Wales

In *Bhatia v State of New South Wales*, the applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of the primary judge. The applicant had sought a government grant for sporting achievements.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in dismissing the applicant's proceedings. Specifically, the court considered whether the appeal was incompetent due to a failure to seek leave, as required by s 101(2)(e) of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW), and whether the proceedings constituted an abuse of process, being frivolous, vexatious, and disclosing no reasonable ground for appeal, pursuant to r 13.4 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW).

The Court granted the appellant leave to amend the name of the respondent in the notices of motion. However, the amended notice of appeal was dismissed. The court found the appeal to be incompetent because leave had not been sought, and also dismissed it under r 13.4 of the UCPR on the grounds that it was frivolous and vexatious and disclosed no reasonable ground for appeal. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, quantified at $10,000 plus GST.