Legal Research
Cases
Jorgensen v Wilson

Jorgensen v Wilson

Case [2023] ACTCA 45 30 November 2023

Statutory Construction

Civil Procedure

Statutory Interpretation

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	Jorgensen v Wilson
Citation:	[2023] ACTCA 45
Hearing Date:	19 June 2023
DecisionDate:	30 November 2023
Before:	Curtin AJ
Decision:	(1) I grant leave to the respondents nunc pro tunc to file the application in proceeding dated 14 June 2023 and, to the extent necessary, lift the stay imposed by s 67A of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) for the hearing and determination of that application. (2) The appeal is permanently stayed. (3) The appellant/respondent to the application is to pay the respondents/applicants to the application costs of the application.
Catchwords:	APPEAL – Procedure – Vexatious litigant – whether appellant has been declared a vexatious litigant – whether appellant has right of appeal from declaration that he is a vexatious litigant – Section 67A of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) – whether an order declaring appellant a vexatious litigant is interlocutory or final – whether leave is required under s 67A to bring an application for leave to appeal – definition of “proceeding” – whether the filing of a notice of appeal is a “proceeding” – application stayed
Legislation Cited:	Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld), s 32A Court Procedure Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 5604 High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), r 2 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 78 Legislation Act 2001 (ACT), ss 139, 140 Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), ss 8, 37E, 37J, 67A Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 84, 101 Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic), ss 17, 21 Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld), s 69 Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), ss 6, 10, 11 Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW), 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16 Vexatious Proceedings Act 2014 (Vic), ss 3, 30, 79, 84
Cases Cited:	Accident Towing and Advisory Committee v Combined Motor Industries Pty Ltd [1987] VR 529 Arrow International Australia Ltd v Group Konstrukt Pty Ltd [2012] ACTCA 37 Attorney-General for the State of Victoria v Weston [2004] VSC 314 Be Financial Pty Ltd v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 Carr v Finance Corporations of Australia Ltd (No 1) [1981] HCA 20; 147 CLR 246 Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373 Civil & Civic Corporation Pty Ltd v Nova Builders Pty Ltd [2023] ACTCA 30 Clemens v Phillip Morris Ltd [2008] VSCA 48 Collier v Attorney General (NSW) [2023] NSWCA 273 Collins v R (1975) 133 CLR 120 Conde v Gilfoyle & Anor [2010] QCA 109 Coulter v R (1988) 164 CLR 350 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337 Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5) [2023] ACTSC 218 Hall v Nominal Defendant (1966) 117 CLR 423 Hunters Hill Municipal Council v Pedler [1976] 1 NSWLR Jones v Skyring (1992) 66 ALJR 810 Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the ACT [2023] ACTSC 357 Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the ACT (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 358 Jorgensen v Wilson (No 2) [2023]…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Jorgensen v Wilson

Details

AGLC: Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45
Case: [2023] ACTCA 45
Decision Date: 30 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Jorgensen v Wilson*, heard by Curtin AJ, the appellant sought to appeal a declaration made by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory that he was a vexatious litigant. The respondents sought to stay the appeal, arguing that the appellant did not have an unfettered right of appeal from such a declaration and that leave was required under section 67A of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT).

The central legal issues before the court were whether an order declaring a party a vexatious litigant was interlocutory or final, and consequently, whether leave to appeal was required under section 67A of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT). Further, the court considered whether the filing of a notice of appeal constituted a "proceeding" for the purposes of section 67A, which imposes a stay on proceedings where a party has been declared a vexatious litigant.

Curtin AJ reasoned that an order declaring a party a vexatious litigant is a final order, as it finally determines the rights of the parties in relation to the specific issue of vexatious litigation. Therefore, an appeal from such an order would ordinarily require leave. The court also determined that the filing of a notice of appeal is a "proceeding" within the meaning of section 67A. Consequently, the appeal was permanently stayed.

The court granted leave to the respondents *nunc pro tunc* to file their application dated 14 June 2023 and lifted the stay imposed by section 67A for the hearing and determination of that application. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the application.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) I grant leave to the respondents nunc pro tunc to file the application in proceeding dated 14 June 2023 and, to the extent necessary, lift the stay imposed by s 67A of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) for the hearing and determination of that application.

(2) The appeal is permanently stayed.

(3) The appellant/respondent to the application is to pay the respondents/applicants to the application costs of the application.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45

Most Recent Citation

Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital; Territory (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 358

Cases citing this decision · 6 of 6 shown

Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the Act (No 8)
[2025] ACTSC 394

…ACTSC 12 Fidelitas Shipping Co Ltd v V/O Exportchleb [1966] 1 QB 630 Hoystead v Commissioner of Taxation [1925] HCA 51; 37 CLR 290 Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45; 383 FLR 312 Kay v Attorney-General (Vic) [2000] VSCA 176; 2 VR 436 O'Toole v Charles David Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 14; 171 CLR 232 Proietti v Proietti [2…
Ezekiel-Hart v Council for the Law Society of the Act
[2024] ACTCA 2

…ian National University [2009] HCA 27; 239 CLR 175 Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 7) [2024] ACTSC 12 Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45 Southern Cross Oil v Fire and All Risks [1990] 21 NSWLR 200…
Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 7)
[2024] ACTSC 12

…90) 170 CLR 104 Hambleton and Anor v Labaj [2010] QSC 124 Kowalski v Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd [2011] FCAFC 159; 198 FCR 153 Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45 Jorgensen v Wilson (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 40 Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls [2011] HCA 48; 244 CLR 427 Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd v Kowal…
Jorgensen v Wilson (No 2)
[2023] ACTCA 50

…Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45 Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (No 3) [2023] ACTSC 396…
Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital; Territory (No 3)
[2023] ACTSC 396

…al proceedings) were represented by the same firm of solicitors and counsel as appeared in the associated appeal matter: see Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45. The matters I heard and determined in my judgments in these proceedings and the appeal matter substantially overlapped and were heard together. 17․The tot…
Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital; Territory (No 2)
[2023] ACTSC 358 Para 1

…hanism utilised was the filing of an application in proceedings by the respondents. The citation for my judgment in that matter is Jorgensen v Wilson [2023] ACTCA 45.…

View all 6 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 50 of 60 shown

Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital; Territory (No 2)
[2023] ACTSC 358 Para 1

…similar) proceedings and applications being made. My judgment in the judicial review proceedings (see Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the ACT (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 358) describes the matter more fully.…
Collier v Attorney General (NSW)
[2023] NSWCA 273 Para 1

…Subsequent to reserving judgment in this matter the NSW Court of Appeal handed down its decision in Collier v Attorney General (NSW) [2023] NSWCA 273, a vexatious proceedings case. In that case the Court of Appeal recognised that access to courts was a fundamental legal liberty, but nevertheless one which was capab…
Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory
[2023] ACTSC 357 Para 1

…rders, and the power and authority of the Court to make such orders, are set out in a separate judgment: see Jorgensen v The Supreme Court of the ACT [2023] ACTSC 357. A reader interested in the subject may also wish to refer to my judgment in Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5) [2023] A…
Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5)
[2023] ACTSC 218 Para 1

…CTSC 357. A reader interested in the subject may also wish to refer to my judgment in Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5) [2023] ACTSC 218 where similar orders were made, and the authorities referred to.…
Civil & Civic Corporation Pty Ltd v Nova Builders Pty Ltd
[2023] ACTCA 30 Para 1

…In Civil & Civic Corporation Pty Ltd v Nova Builders Pty Ltd [2023] ACTCA 30, I summarised several general principles of statutory construction as I understood them. I said:…
Jorgensen v Wilson (No 2)
[2023] ACTSC 40 Para 1

…On 10 March 2023, Mossop J delivered judgment in Jorgensen v Wilson (No 2) [2023] ACTSC 40 ( Wilson (No 2) ) and most relevantly declared Mr Jorgensen to be a vexatious litigant.…
Manny v Nissen (No 2)
[2023] ACTCA 20 Para 1

…In Coulter v R [1988] HCA 3; 164 CLR 350 (cited with approval in Manny v Nissen (No 2) [2023] ACTCA 20 at [13]), the majority noted that a leave requirement was a preliminary procedure “recognised by the legislature as a means of enabling the court to control in some measure the volume of appellate work requiring…
Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt
[2022] NSWSC 1373 Para 1

…any application made by email (or other informal means) as an application in proceedings: see Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373 at [155]-[157]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1433 at [11]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2010] NSWCA 207 at [5]; The Estate of Alber…
Turan Ahmed v Ziynet Ahmed
[2022] NSWSC 921 Para 1

…, but I simply wish to note at this point that there are considerations warranting not granting that leave. I note that in Turan Ahmed v Ziynet Ahmed [2022] NSWSC 921 Hammerschlag CJ in Eq refused an application by a self-represented litigant to himself conduct, that is without legal representation, proceedings ins…
The Estate of Alberto Magri
[2022] NSWSC 873 Para 1

…-[157]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1433 at [11]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2010] NSWCA 207 at [5]; The Estate of Alberto Magri [2022] NSWSC 873 at [32]; Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5) [2023] ACTSC 218 at [25]-[35]. Indeed, there are many disadvantages avoided…
Murch v Annesley
[2021] VSCA 83 Para 1

…been made may only seek leave to appeal from such an order (and has no right of appeal) and may only do so on a question of law: see Murch v Annesley [2021] VSCA 83.…
Mohareb v Palmer (No 3)
[2021] NSWCA 39 Para 1

…In Mohareb v Palmer (No 3) [2021] NSWCA 39 Basten JA was dealing with an application for leave to appeal from orders made under the VPNSW that the applicant was prohibited from instituting any proceeding against Mr Palmer in New South Wales. Basten JA noted that in an ordinary case, leave would be required pursuan…
Will v Brighton
[2020] NSWCA 355 Para 1

…See also Will v Brighton [2020] NSWCA 355 per Bell P at [52]-[57] and Basten JA at [109], [111]-[120] to similar effect.…
Mohareb v Palmer (No 2)
[2020] NSWCA 324 Para 1

…In Mohareb v Palmer (No 2) [2020] NSWCA 324 the Court of Appeal was dealing with an application for leave to appeal from orders made under the VPNSW prohibiting Mr Mohareb from instituting any proceeding against Mr Palmer in NSW and from instituting any new proceeding against any person in NSW.…
Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd
[2020] NSWCA 291 Para 1

…In Zepinic v Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd [2020] NSWCA 291 Bell P and White JA were dealing with an application for leave to appeal. After noting at [19] that the definition of ‘proceeding’ in s 4 of the VPNSW included “any calling into question of a decision, whether or not a final decision, of a court or trib…
UBS AG v Tyne
[2018] HCA 45 Para 1

…In the appeal to the High Court in that case, UBS AG v Tyne as Trustee of the Argot Trust (2018) 265 CLR 77 Kiefel CJ, Bell and Keane JJ referred to a number of fetters on a party’s right to sue at [38]-[41]. For example, a party does not have an unfettered right to amend his her or its pleadings, but rather only ha…
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Jayasinghe
[2016] FCAFC 79

…103. In Commissioner of Taxation v Jayasinghe [2016] FCAFC 79; 247 FCR 40 Allsop CJ said at [7] that that passage from CIC had been cited too often to be doubted and cited 15 joint or single judgments of the High Court in support of that proposition. 104. With that said, the primacy of the words used in the statut…
Tyne v UBS AG (No 3)
[2016] FCA 5 Para 1

…Further, I note that in Tyne v UBS AG (No 3) [2016] FCA 5 Greenwood J disagreed with a similar proposition. His Honour said at [423]:…
Potier v Attorney General (NSW)
[2015] NSWCA 129 Para 1

…In Potier v Attorney-General, New South Wales [2015] NSWCA 129 Leeming JA, with whom Basten and Meagher JJA relevantly agreed, held at [47] that leave to appeal from the making of a vexatious proceedings order was “probably required” (although the point was not finally decided) because the order challenged was inte…
Viavattene v Attorney General of New South Wales
[2014] NSWCA 218 Para 1

…In Viavattene v Attorney General of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 218 Basten JA and Tobias AJA were dealing with an application from orders prohibiting the applicant from instituting proceedings in New South Wales without leave of the Court, and orders staying all proceedings in New South Wales already instituted by…
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd
[2012] HCA 55 Para 39

…n was described in the joint judgment of French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Bell and Gageler JJ in Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd [2012] HCA 55; 250 CLR 503 at [39] wherein their Honours said: This Court has stated on many occasions that the task of statutory construction must begin with a co…
Bar-Mordecai v Attorney General (NSW); Bar-Mordecai v State of New South Wales
[2012] NSWCA 207 Para 21

…the orders made below, such leave may also be required pursuant to s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act : cf Bar Mordecai v State of New South Wales [2012] NSWCA 207; 83 NSWLR 125 at [21]-[22]. It is arguable that such an appeal falls within s 9 and thus does not require leave under s 14. The imposition of an addi…
Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das
[2012] NSWCA 164 Para 1

…That statement has been held to be applicable to civil, as well as criminal, appellate jurisdiction: Be Financial Pty Ltd v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 at [32]–[36] per Basten JA (Tobias AJA agreeing).…
Preston v Dukes
[2012] ACTCA 29 Para 1

…In the ACT Higgins CJ, Penfold and Rares JJ said at [12] in Preston v Dukes [2012] ACTCA 29 that the refusal of leave to appeal was refusal of permission by the Court for a party to institute proceedings by way of appeal in the Court.…
Kowalski v Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd
[2011] FCAFC 159

…hose rights: Wentwort h at 484; Soden v Kowalski [2011] FCA 318 per Stone J at [35] and in the Full Court: Kowalski v Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd (2011) 198 FCR 153; [2011] FCAFC 159 at [58].…
Teoh v Hunters Hill Council (No 4)
[2011] NSWCA 324 Para 1

…eal with which this judgment is concerned) I made what is known in NSW as a Teoh direction. A Teoh direction (from Teoh v Hunters Hill Council (No 4) [2011] NSWCA 324) is occasionally made when a litigant brings multiple proceedings or applications in a court each of which is substantially the same and each of whic…
Soden v Kowalski
[2011] FCA 318 Para 35

…le means of settlement of disputes. Restriction of access to courts is an extreme interference with those rights: Wentwort h at 484; Soden v Kowalski [2011] FCA 318 per Stone J at [35] and in the Full Court: Kowalski v Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd (2011) 198 FCR 153; [2011] FCAFC 159 at [58].…
Klewer v Attorney-General (NSW)
[2010] NSWCA 219 Para 1

…In Klewer v Attorney General (NSW) [2010] NSWCA 219 the Court of Appeal had before it an appeal from an order made under that section (and which survived pursuant to the transitional provisions of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) (the VPNSW ) which repealed s 84).…
Tucci v Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
[2010] VSC 425 Para 1

…bell JA, Beazley and Ipp JJA agreeing); Accident Towing and Advisory Committee v Combined Motor Industries Pty Ltd [1987] VR 529 at 547; Tucci v VCAT [2010] VSC 425; (2010) 33 VAR 206 at [16]; Woodcrest Homes Pty Ltd v Fair Trading Tribunal [2002] NSWSC 552 at [33].…
Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited
[2010] NSWCA 207 Para 1

…ility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373 at [155]-[157]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1433 at [11]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2010] NSWCA 207 at [5]; The Estate of Alberto Magri [2022] NSWSC 873 at [32]; Ezekiel-Hart v The Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 5) [2023] ACTSC 218 at [25…
Conde v Gilfoyle
[2010] QCA 109 Para 1

…In Conde v Gilfoyle & Anor [2010] QCA 109, the primary judge had ordered that certain, identified proceedings be stayed and that, pursuant to s 6(2)(b) of the VPQ, Mr Conde was prohibited from instituting any proceeding (within the meaning of that word in the definition of “proceeding” in the VPQ) in a court or t…
Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited
[2009] NSWSC 1433 Para 1

…pplication in proceedings: see Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373 at [155]-[157]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1433 at [11]; Magjarraj v Asteron Life Limited [2010] NSWCA 207 at [5]; The Estate of Alberto Magri [2022] NSWSC 873 at [32]; Ezekiel-Hart v The Council o…
Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue
[2009] HCA 41 Para 47

…the joint judgment of Hayne, Heydon, Crennan and Kiefel JJ (as her Honour then was) in Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41; 239 CLR 27 at [47] wherein their Honours said: This court has stated on many occasions that the task of statutory construction must begin with a con…
Macatangay v State of New South Wales
[2009] NSWCA 81 Para 1

…Basten JA expressed that view in Macatangay v New South Wales [2009] NSWCA 81. His Honour said:…
Polo/Lauren Company LP v Ziliani Holdings Pty Ltd
[2008] FCAFC 195 Para 1

…Dictionaries are an aid to interpretation but do not govern it. As the Full Court said in Polo/Lauren Co LP v Ziliani Holdings Pty Ltd (2008) 173 FCR 266:…
Clemens v Phillip Morris Ltd
[2008] VSCA 48 Para 1

…In Clemens v Phillip Morris Ltd [2008] VSCA 48 the Court of Appeal considered a different but related point. That was, where leave was granted to a vexatious litigant to commence proceedings in which he or she subsequently failed, leave was required under s 21(4) of the SCV to initiate an appeal against that deci…
Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Valuer-General
[2007] NSWCA 181 Para 1

…deration to the competing (and sometimes non-competing) interpretations advanced by those parties: see Trust Co of Australia Ltd v The Valuer-General [2007] NSWCA 181 at [11] (per Campbell JA, Beazley and Ipp JJA agreeing); Accident Towing and Advisory Committee v Combined Motor Industries Pty Ltd [1987] VR 529 at…
Tsekouras v Olsen; Olsen v Tsekouras
[2007] NSWSC 556 Para 1

…(Yeldham J); Jones v Skyring (1992) 66 ALJR 810 at 814 (Toohey J); Ramsey v Skyring (1999) 164 ALR 378 at 391 [59] (Sackville J); Tsekouras v Olsen [2007] NSWSC 556, [29] (Bryson AJ); Kay v Attorney-General (2000) 2 VR 436 at 446 [27] (Chernov JA); and Attorney-General for the State of Victoria v Weston [2004] VSC…
Shaw v Jim McGinty in his capacity as Attorney General
[2006] WASCA 231 Para 18

…y-General [2000] VSCA 176; 2 VR 436, at 447-451 [31]-[40], per Chernov JA (with whom Ormiston and Batt JJA agreed); Shaw v McGinty (Attorney-General) [2006] WASCA 231, at [18], per Wheeler JA (with whom Steytler P and Buss JA agreed).…
Attorney-General for the State of Victoria v Weston
[2004] VSC 314 Para 1

…WSC 556, [29] (Bryson AJ); Kay v Attorney-General (2000) 2 VR 436 at 446 [27] (Chernov JA); and Attorney-General for the State of Victoria v Weston [2004] VSC 314, [13] (Whelan J).…
Woodcrest Homes Pty Ltd v Fair Trading Tribunal
[2002] NSWSC 552 Para 1

…otor Industries Pty Ltd [1987] VR 529 at 547; Tucci v VCAT [2010] VSC 425; (2010) 33 VAR 206 at [16]; Woodcrest Homes Pty Ltd v Fair Trading Tribunal [2002] NSWSC 552 at [33].…
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy
[2000] HCA 63 Para 1

…e. Mr Jorgensen did not identify any things I had said or done, nor did he seek to link those to the requirements of the double might test set out in Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337.…
Kay v Attorney-General
[2000] VSCA 176

…re interlocutory and not final: Attorney General (NSW) v Spautz [2000] NSWSC 45, at [10][11], per Brownie AJ; Kay v Attorney-General [2000] VSCA 176; 2 VR 436, at 447-451 [31]-[40], per Chernov JA (with whom Ormiston and Batt JJA agreed); Shaw v McGinty (Attorney-General) [2006] WASCA 231, at [18], per Whee…
DJL v Central Authority
[2000] HCA 17 Para 47

…there are no proceedings in this Court, in the sense identified in Collins v R [1975] HCA 60; 133 CLR 120 at 122, applied in DJL v Central Authority [2000] HCA 17; 201 CLR 226 at [47] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ). Accordingly, the first refusal of leave does not give rise to a res judicata…
House of Peace Pty Ltd v Bankstown City Council
[2000] NSWCA 44

…oach taken by the learned first instance judge and by counsel, a dictionary definition is not conclusive and must be used with caution. As Mason P in House of Peace Pty Ltd v Bankstown City Council (2000) 48 NSWLR 498 noted at [28]: A dictionary may offer a reasonably authoritative source for describing the range of meanings of a word, including obsole…
Attorney General in and for the State of NSW v Spautz
[2000] NSWSC 45 Para 10

…VP Act), the order does not finally determine the rights of the parties and is therefore interlocutory and not final: Attorney General (NSW) v Spautz [2000] NSWSC 45, at [10][11], per Brownie AJ; Kay v Attorney-General [2000] VSCA 176; 2 VR 436, at 447-451 [31]-[40], per Chernov JA (with whom Ormiston and Batt JJA…
Ramsey v Skyring
[1999] FCA 907 Para 1

…(Willmer LJ); Hunters Hill Municipal Council v Pedler [1976] 1 NSWLR 478 at 488F (Yeldham J); Jones v Skyring (1992) 66 ALJR 810 at 814 (Toohey J); Ramsey v Skyring (1999) 164 ALR 378 at 391 [59] (Sackville J); Tsekouras v Olsen [2007] NSWSC 556, [29] (Bryson AJ); Kay v Attorney-General (2000) 2 VR 436 at 446 [27] (Cherno…
CIC Insurance Ltd v Bankstown Football Club Ltd
[1997] HCA 2

…e primacy of the words used in the statute. 102. Context must be considered in the first instance. In CIC Insurance Ltd v Bankstown Football Club Ltd (1997) 187 CLR 384 Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey and Gummow JJ, Gaudron J agreeing, said at 408: Moreover, the modern approach to statutory interpretation (a) insists that…
Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd
[1993] HCA 15

…er Lyons J agreeing). Far from being convinced that the decision is plainly wrong (cf Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 485 at 492), the conclusion seems to me to be correct. It suffices to observe that there will be a class of cases where orders are made under the Vexatious…
Jones v Skyring
[1992] HCA 39 Para 1

…1 QB 197 at 209–210 (Ormerod LJ), 215 (Willmer LJ); Hunters Hill Municipal Council v Pedler [1976] 1 NSWLR 478 at 488F (Yeldham J); Jones v Skyring (1992) 66 ALJR 810 at 814 (Toohey J); Ramsey v Skyring (1999) 164 ALR 378 at 391 [59] (Sackville J); Tsekouras v Olsen [2007] NSWSC 556, [29] (Bryson AJ); Kay v Attorney-…

Legislation cited in this decision · 15

Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT)
37E, 37J, 67A, 8 5 mentions (from Para 1)
Vexatious Proceedings Act 2014 (Vic)
3, 30, 79, 84 5 mentions (from Para 1)
Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld)
10, 11, 6 4 mentions (from Para 1)
Legislation Act 2001 (ACT)
139, 140 3 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
101, 84 3 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic)
17, 21 3 mentions (from Para 1)
Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld)
32A 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Court Procedure Rules 2006 (ACT)
5604 2 mentions (from Para 1)
High Court Rules 2004 (Cth)
2 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)
78 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld)
69 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT)
1 mention
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW)
1 mention
Vexatious Litigants Act 1981 (Qld)
1 mention
Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 1)