Boulos v Martin (No 2)

[2012] NSWCA 161

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Boulos v Martin (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 161

Hearing dates:

18 May 2012

Decision date:

18 May 2012

Before:

Whealy JA at [1]
Tobias AJA at [25]

Decision:

Order that, to the extent that the Notice of Motion seeks to review the decision of this Court on 26 March 2012 refusing leave, that aspect of the Motion is dismissed.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Catchwords:

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION - Notice of Motion to review prior decision of Court refusing leave to appeal - self-represented litigant - Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.16 - whether earlier refusal of leave was made irregularly, illegally or against good faith - no denial of good faith or natural justice on refusal of leave alone - Motion dismissed.

Legislation Cited:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) - r 36.15, r 36.16

Cases Cited:

- Champerslife Pty Ltd v Manojlovski [2010] NSWCA 33; (2009) 75 NSWLR 245
- Sanofi v Parke Davis Pty Ltd (No 1) [1982] HCA 9; 149 CLR 147
- Teoh v Hunters Hill Council (No 4) [2011] NSWCA 324

Category:

Interlocutory applications

Parties:

Barry Boulos (Applicant)
Dr Peter Martin (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
Barry Boulos (in person) (Applicant)
G M Gregg (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Unrepresented (Applicant)
DibbsBarker (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2010/397526

Judgment

1. WHEALY JA: The Court is in a position to give a decision in the matter on the first point raised by Mr Boulos in his Notice of Motion. It is necessary, however, for me to say something about the history of the proceedings.

1. On 26 March a two person bench comprising Tobias AJA and myself dismissed an application for leave to appeal brought by Mr Boulos whom I shall call the applicant. The leave application related to an appeal from orders made by his Honour Judge Colefax in the District Court on 24 June 2011. Essentially his Honour had dismissed a Statement of Claim issued by the applicant and did so on the basis that the proceedings were an abuse of process. At issue had been the principle of res judicata because, as the primary judge held, the applicant had already obtained a judgment against the respondent on precisely the same cause of action as pleaded in the District Court proceedings.

1. This Court dismissed the leave application on the basis that the applicant had failed to demonstrate an arguable case. A reading of the Court's decision will provide the full background to the arguments before this Court and an understanding as to why we came to our conclusion. I will not, however, repeat in this…