Gomez v Judge Burchardt & Ors

The plaintiff, Mr Gomez, initiated proceedings in the High Court of Australia seeking a constitutional or other writ to prohibit the Federal Circuit Court from making any findings or orders in relation to matter MLG3728 of 2018, which was described as incidental to matter M126 of 2018 filed in the High Court. Subsequently, Mr Gomez and the second defendant, JNGO Pty Ltd, jointly filed a summons seeking a stay of proceedings in matter MLG3728 of 2018. The first defendant, Judge Burchardt, filed a submitting appearance, while the third defendant, a trustee, filed a response.

The High Court was required to determine whether to dismiss the plaintiff's application for a writ and the joint summons for a stay. Specifically, the court considered whether these applications disclosed an arguable basis for the relief sought or constituted an abuse of the court's process, pursuant to rules 25.09.1 and 13.03.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth).

The court reasoned that the plaintiff's current proceedings represented a further attempt to relitigate issues that had already been considered and dismissed by the High Court, including a refusal to grant special leave to appeal. Applying the principles established in cases such as *Timbercorp Finance Pty Ltd (In liq) v Collins* and *Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd*, the court found that the plaintiff's conduct was unjustifiably oppressive to the parties and likely to bring the administration of justice into disrepute, thereby constituting an abuse of process by contravening the principle of finality in litigation.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed both the summons dated 15 April 2019 and the application for a constitutional or other writ dated 19 March 2019, with costs ordered in favour of the third defendant.