Legal Research
Cases
Knight v Money

Knight v Money

Case [2015] VSC 105 24 March 2015

Jurisdiction

Abuse of Process

Res Judicata

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

No. S CI 2013 480
No. S CI 2013 2044

JULIAN KNIGHT	Plaintiff/Applicant
v
BRENDAN MONEY	Defendant/Respondent

---

JUDGE:	CAVANOUGH J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	16 August 2013. Last written submission filed 27 September 2013
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	24 March 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Knight v Money
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 105	Revision No 1: 27 March 2015

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Vexatious litigant – Applications for leave to commence proceedings – Applicant a prisoner under sentence – Proposed challenges to aspects of sentence management ‑ Whether proposed proceedings would not be an abuse of process – Whether proposed proceedings would not be foredoomed to fail – Applications dismissed – Supreme Court Act 1986 s 21 – Vexatious Proceedings Act 2014 ss 29, 32, 54, 55, 90, 91, 92, 93, 100, 101 – Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 s 14 – Corrections Act 1986 ss 6A, 20, 21, 47, 56AC, 73A, 74, 74AA, 74AAB, 112 – Corrections Regulations 2009, reg22, 23, 24, 25, 26.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff/Applicant	The applicant in person
For the Defendant/Respondent	Ms C M Harris	Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

Mr Julian Knight is serving a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 27 years for multiple murders committed by him in a notorious massacre in the vicinity of Hoddle Street, Clifton Hill in 1987. Mr Knight’s minimum non-parole period expired on 8 May 2014. However, he remains in prison.

During his imprisonment, Mr Knight has commenced or sought to commence numerous legal proceedings and has made numerous official complaints, mainly about the conditions of his imprisonment. On 19 October 2004 Smith J made an order under s 21(2) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (as it then stood) declaring Mr Knight a vexatious litigant. The order further provided that, for a period of ten years from the date of the order, Mr Knight was not to commence any legal proceedings in this Court or any other court or tribunal without the leave of this Court.[1] Mr Knight has since made many applications for leave to commence legal proceedings pursuant to the order of Smith J. Two such applications are before the Court now. They are related. In short, Mr Knight seeks leave to bring claims by way of judicial review in relation to his sentence plan in prison and in relation to a refusal to transfer him from an ordinary prison to a transitional centre. A common theme of the two applications is Mr Knight’s desire to be released on parole. The proposed defendant in each proposed proceeding is Mr Brendan Money, a senior official of Corrections Victoria. Mr Money was served with both applications for leave and he appeared by counsel to oppose the grant of leave in each case.
[1]Attorney-General (Victoria) v Knight [2004] VSC 407. Section 21 was repealed from 31 October…

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 Knight v Money

Details

AGLC: Knight v Money [2015] VSC 105
Case: [2015] VSC 105
Decision Date: 24 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Knight v Money, the applicant, Knight, a prisoner under sentence, sought leave to commence proceedings against the respondent, Money, a correctional officer, and other defendants. Knight intended to challenge aspects of the management of his sentence, alleging breaches of his human rights and the Correctional Services Act. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the proposed proceedings would not constitute an abuse of process and whether they were not foredoomed to fail. The court considered whether the claims were frivolous or vexatious, and whether they had any reasonable prospect of success.

The court examined the legislative framework, including the Supreme Court Act, Vexatious Proceedings Act, and the Corrections Act, to assess whether Knight's applications were frivolous or vexatious. It also considered the Interpretation of Legislation Act and relevant regulations to determine the scope of the claims. The court found that Knight's claims were not only vexatious but also lacked any reasonable prospect of success. The court concluded that the proposed proceedings would be an abuse of process and would inevitably fail.

The court dismissed Knight's applications for leave to commence proceedings. It found that the applications were vexatious and without merit. The court noted that Knight's claims were repetitive and had been previously considered and dismissed by other courts. The court also found that the proposed proceedings would not be in the public interest and would only serve to waste the resources of the court system. The court ordered that Knight pay the respondent's costs of the application.

Orders