Le Tuan Pham v Ex Parte

Le Tuan Pham, a self-represented litigant, applied for leave to appeal against four separate decisions made in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The application was heard by the Court of Appeal, which was tasked with determining whether it had the inherent jurisdiction to dismiss Pham’s appeals for want of prosecution and whether it could dismiss the appeals pursuant to section 29 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010. Additionally, the court examined whether Pham's rights to equality before the law and a fair trial were upheld, particularly whether the court was required to provide reasons for refusing to seal an originating process under rule 27.06 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005.

The court considered the interplay between Pham’s rights under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 and the procedural rules governing the court’s ability to dismiss appeals. It evaluated whether the inherent jurisdiction of the court to manage its own process included the power to dismiss an appeal without a hearing, and whether this action was consistent with the procedural fairness required by the Charter. The court also examined the necessity of providing reasons for refusal to seal an originating process and whether this was required to ensure Pham's right to a fair hearing.

In its decision, the court found that it did possess the inherent jurisdiction to dismiss appeals for want of prosecution, aligning with the procedural law that ensures the rights to equality before the law and a fair trial. The court held that the dismissal of the appeals was consistent with the Charter's requirements, as the procedural rules did not mandate the provision of reasons for such refusals. Consequently, the court dismissed Pham's application for leave to appeal.

The final orders of the court were that Pham's applications for leave to appeal were dismissed, and the court affirmed its jurisdiction to manage its processes in a manner that upholds the principles of procedural fairness and equality before the law.