Keating v Woods

This matter came before the High Court of Australia concerning an application by Mr Oisin Geoffrey Keating for special leave to appeal from a judgment of Owen J in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Mr Keating also had before the court two summonses for directions, one filed on 29 June and another on 1 August of the same year. Mr Keating appeared in person and sought to change his application, requesting either a stay of the special leave proceedings or permission to commence a new action in the High Court.

The legal issues before the court were whether to grant Mr Keating's request to commence a new action in the High Court, potentially in lieu of his application for special leave to appeal, and how to manage the existing applications on the court file. The court was also concerned with a previous attempt by Mr Keating to issue a writ against the Commonwealth, which had been refused by the registrar under an order from Deane J, requiring leave of the court to issue. Mr Keating indicated his intention to bring an action similar to the Supreme Court action, but joining the Commonwealth as a defendant, alleging failure to provide treatment under the *Health Insurance Act 1973*.

The court expressed concern about the potential for confusion arising from multiple, potentially conflicting, applications remaining on the file. His Honour noted that the rules of the High Court allow for the registrar to refer processes that appear vexatious or oppressive to a judge, who can then make an order leaving it open for the applicant to seek leave to proceed. The court clarified that Mr Keating's Supreme Court action had been dismissed in his absence on the grounds of being statute-barred, and that a Master had made this dismissal, which Mr Keating believed was beyond the Master's jurisdiction.

Given that the Supreme Court action had been dismissed, Mr Keating's application for special leave to appeal from that judgment was rendered moot. The court indicated that any new action would be a separate proceeding, and that Mr Keating would need to follow the appropriate procedures for initiating such an action, including seeking leave if required.