Gallo v The Honourable Justice Dawson

The Honourable Justice Dawson, a Justice of the High Court of Australia, was the subject of proceedings initiated by Mrs K. Gallo, who appeared in person. Mr M.E.J. Black, QC, with Mr C.M. Maxwell, appeared for the applicant seeking to strike out these proceedings. The core of the dispute concerned allegations of judicial misconduct and bias made by Mrs Gallo against Justice Dawson in his capacity as a judge of the High Court.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the proceedings brought against Justice Dawson could succeed, and if not, whether they should be struck out. Specifically, the applicant contended that no cause of action known to the law was alleged and that judges possess total immunity for acts performed in their judicial capacity. Applications were made under Order 26 rule 18(1) and (2) of the Rules of the Court to strike out the pleading, as well as under the Court's inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process, and under Order 63 rule 2 for a perpetual stay on the grounds that the action was vexatious, oppressive, and lacked reasonable or probable cause.

The applicant's submissions were based on the fundamental principle of judicial immunity. It was argued that the law provides absolute protection for acts done by a judge in their judicial capacity, regardless of whether those acts were alleged to be biased or discriminatory. The initiating document, a writ accompanied by a "General Endorsement," outlined Mrs Gallo's claim for damages, alleging that Justice Dawson had exhibited bias and discrimination against her in hearing her cases, and had failed in his duty as a Justice. These allegations stemmed from Justice Dawson's alleged prior knowledge of her affairs and his role as Solicitor-General, which Mrs Gallo claimed led to an improper order against her as a vexatious litigant.