Liprini v Medical Council of New South Wales

[2024] NSWSC 1381

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Liprini v Medical Council of New South Wales [2024] NSWSC 1381

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Date of orders:

30 October 2024

Decision date:

30 October 2024

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Harrison CJ at CL

Decision:

Application dismissed

Catchwords:

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Parties – vexatious litigants – leave to institute proceedings – affidavit filed pursuant to s 14(3) Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) – whether affidavit substantially complied with requirements of s 14(3) – failure adequately to disclose details of previous applications for leave to commence proceedings – application dismissed

Legislation Cited:

Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) ss 8, 14, 15

Cases Cited:

Health Care Complaints Commission v Liprini [2020] NSWCATOD 94

Pascoe v Liprini [2011] NSWSC 1484

Pearce & Anor (formerly Pascoe) v Liprini [2014] NSWSC 1316

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

Allan Liprini (Plaintiff)
Medical Council of New South Wales (Defendant)

File Number(s):

2024/00209501

Publication restriction:

Nil

JUDGMENT

1. HIS HONOUR: By two summonses dated 22 February 2024 but filed on 12 March 2024 and 26 July 2024, Dr Allan Liprini seeks the following relief:

“Leave of the Court to file and progress a review of NCAT decision in Occupational Professional Medical Division”.

2. On 25 August 2020, the occupational division of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal made an order cancelling Dr Liprini’s registration as a medical practitioner: Health Care Complaints Commission v Liprini [2020] NSWCATOD 94.

3. Dr Liprini is currently subject to an order made by Adamson J on 5 December 2011 pursuant to the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008: Pascoe v Liprini [2011] NSWSC 1484. That order is in the following terms:

(1) Pursuant to s 8(7)(b) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008, the Defendant is prohibited from instituting proceedings in New South Wales without leave of the Court.

…

4. On 26 September 2014, Hidden J dismissed a motion by Dr Liprini pursuant to s 9 of the Act seeking to set aside those orders: see Pearce & Anor (formerly Pascoe) v Liprini [2014] NSWSC 1316.

5. Pursuant to s 14(2) of the Act, Dr Liprini may apply to an appropriate authorised court for leave to institute proceedings that the order would otherwise prohibit him from instituting.

6. Section 14(3) of the Act provides that Dr Liprini must file an affidavit with the application. That sub-section is as follows:

(3)  The applicant must file an affidavit with the application that—

(a)   lists all occasions on which the applicant has applied for leave—

(i)   under this section, or

(ii) before the commencement of this section—as required by an order under section 70 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 or section 84 of the Supreme Court Act 1970, and

(b)   lists all other proceedings the applicant has instituted in Australia, including proceedings instituted before the commencement of this section, and

(c)   discloses all facts material to the application, whether supporting or adverse to the application, that are known to the applicant.

7. By s 15(1) of the Act, an appropriate authorised court must dismiss an application made under s 14 for leave to institute proceedings if it considers –

(a) the affidavit required by section 14(3) does not substantially comply with that subsection, or

(b)   the proceedings are vexatious proceedings, or

(c)   there is no prima facie ground for the proceedings.

8. Dr Liprini has filed an affidavit purportedly in compliance with s 14 of the Act dated 22 February 2024. In that affidavit, Dr Liprini deposes that he does not believe he is a vexatious litigant. The affidavit confirms details about his medical history and other subjective aspects of his current predicament. Annexed to his affidavit is an application filed by him on 10 August 2023 in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal seeking to restore his medical registration.

9. Dr Liprini’s affidavit contains no detailed information about any previous application or proceedings instituted by him in terms, although it is noted that there is passing reference to “bundles” filed in other proceedings said to satisfy the requirements of s 14.

10. Dr Liprini makes the following observation in relation to the proceedings before Hidden J:

“… my application to set aside the Vexatious Litigant Order was dismissed without explanation by justice Hidden and that my affidavits evidential contents have never been available to the public and more importantly no opportunity was availed to test my evidence in Court by Justice Hidden”.

11. I note that in Pearce & Anor (formerly Pascoe) v Liprini [2014] NSWSC 1316, Hidden J said:

“[6] In the motion before me Dr Liprini relied on a considerable volume of material contained in two affidavits, supplemented by oral evidence in cross-examination by Mr Kirby. I have given all this evidence careful consideration, but no purpose would be served by trying to summarise it. The material in the affidavits was fairly characterised by Mr Kirby, in succinct written submissions, as demonstrating ‘a perseveration with matters which have been the subject of a multiplicity of previous litigation and determinations against him.’ That description was confirmed by his oral evidence. Pervading the whole of the material is his continued claim of fraudulent conduct on the part of his brother, the lawyers, and his trustees, including the present plaintiffs.” (emphasis added).

12. Moreover, the affidavit fails to mention that on 24 March 2012, Dr Liprini made an ex parte application for the stay of a writ of possession issued on 8 March 2012 that required him to give up possession of a property at Sylvania Waters: Pascoe v Liprini [2012] NSWSC 345. White J dismissed those proceedings as an abuse of process, noting that Dr Liprini had not sought leave as required under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008.

Decision

13. In my opinion, Dr Liprini’s application should be dismissed under s 15(1)(a) of the Act because he has failed to comply with the requirements of s 14(3). Dr Liprini’s affidavit does not list all other proceedings he has instituted in Australia, and it does not disclose all material facts known to him, whether supportive of or adverse to, in his application. To the contrary, the affidavit is misleading regarding the conduct of the hearing before Hidden J. The affidavit therefore does not substantially comply with s 14(3) of the Act.

14. For these reasons, the application must be dismissed.

**********

Decision last updated: 30 October 2024