GR v Secretary, Department of Families, Disabilities and Community Services

The applicant, GR, sought leave to appeal interlocutory orders made by the Supreme Court of New South Wales in the exercise of its *parens patriae* jurisdiction. The dispute concerned the listing of further applications by the applicant in the Equity Division, which the primary judge had refused to list on the basis that they were repetitive and an abuse of process. The applicant sought interlocutory relief in the nature of final relief. The appeal was heard by Basten JA of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in refusing to list the applicant's further applications for hearing. This involved considering whether the applications were vexatious or an abuse of process, and whether the *parens patriae* jurisdiction could be invoked in the manner sought by the applicant. The Court also had to determine whether the applicant had demonstrated any error in the primary judge's exercise of discretion.

Basten JA reasoned that the applicant had made numerous applications to the court over a significant period, many of which had been dismissed. The primary judge had previously made orders that further applications would only be listed upon the applicant demonstrating that they raised new issues or presented new evidence not previously considered. The applications before the Court of Appeal were found to be repetitive and did not meet this threshold, constituting an abuse of process. The Court applied the principles relating to vexatious litigation and the proper exercise of the *parens patriae* jurisdiction, noting that while the court has a broad protective jurisdiction, it is not intended to be used for the purpose of relitigating concluded matters or pursuing unmeritorious claims.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's notice of motion filed on 9 April 2020 and refused the further relief sought orally on the hearing of the motion.