Bird v Public Trustee of Queensland & Ors

[2005] HCATrans 795

[2005] HCATrans 795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Brisbane  No B39 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

GEOFFREY JAMES BIRD

Applicant

and

PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF QUEENSLAND

First Respondent

PAULA SCULLY ADULT GUARDIAN

Second Respondent

ELIZABETH JANE RICKLEMAN

Third Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIRBY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 6 OCTOBER 2005, AT 9.19 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

__________________

GUMMOW J:   On 27 February 2004, the applicant was declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to s 3 of the Vexatious Litigants Act 1981 (Q). As a consequence of this, he is prevented from instituting legal proceedings except with the leave of the Supreme Court of Queensland or a Judge thereof (s 3).

The applicant is engaged to the third respondent, Ms Rickleman.  On 9 December 2004, the Guardianship and Administration Tribunal appointed the Adult Guardian as guardian for Ms Rickleman for certain personal matters, and continued the appointment of the Public Trustee of Queensland as administrator for her in all financial matters.  The Tribunal also declared invalid an enduring power of attorney by which Ms Rickleman appointed the applicant her attorney.  In addition, it exercised its discretion expressly to exclude the applicant from a hearing before it.

Ms Rickleman appealed from the whole of this decision.  However, the applicant sought to bring what he termed a cross-appeal, contending that there were additional grounds of appeal besides those raised by Ms Rickleman, and that Ms Rickleman cannot effectively represent herself by reason of her lack of legal knowledge.

On 17 March 2005, the Supreme Court of Queensland (de Jersey CJ) refused the applicant leave to bring his cross-appeal.  Addendum reasons were provided on 7 April 2005.

We have reviewed the applicant’s written case and the reasons of de Jersey CJ.  No question appropriate for the grant of leave arises in the present case.  Accordingly, special leave to appeal is refused. 

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing this application for special leave.  I publish the disposition signed by Kirby J and myself.

AT 9.21 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED