Inglis v Moore

In Inglis v Moore, the Federal Court dismissed an appeal against an order by Smithers J. of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, which dismissed an application by Mrs. Kathleen Inglis, the plaintiff, to join additional defendants and amend her statement of claim in an existing proceeding. The application sought to join the Attorney-General, the Commonwealth of Australia, and the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department as defendants and to add further claims for declarations and injunctions against the existing defendants. Smithers J. dismissed the application, noting that the proposed statement of claim was overly verbose, confusing, and scandalous, and that it sought declarations that crimes had been committed. The Federal Court upheld the dismissal, finding that the proposed pleading was not intelligible and that the claims for declarations were vexatious. The Court held that the application was properly dismissed as it would have required the Supreme Court to enter into proceedings that would abuse its process. The Court also noted that the proposed pleading did not reveal any case for relief against the additional defendants, and that it was oppressive to require the existing defendants to plead to such a statement of claim. The appeal was dismissed with costs.