Luck, In the matter of an application for leave to issue or file

[2023] HCATrans 112

[2023] HCATrans 112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Melbourne  No M53 of 2023

In the matter of -

an application by GAYE LUCK for leave to issue or file

GORDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 7 SEPTEMBER 2023, AT 9.28 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HER HONOUR: Matter number M53/2023 is an ex parte application for leave to issue or file a writ of summons. Pursuant to rule 13.03.1 read with 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), I direct the application for leave to issue or file be determined without an oral hearing. The ex parte application for leave to issue or file is refused. I publish those reasons. In matter number M53/2023, the order of the Court is:

1.        The application for leave to issue or file the writ of summons is refused.

I publish that order.  I further direct that the reasons as published by incorporated into the transcript.

This is an ex parte application for leave to issue or file a writ of summons dated 6 June 2023. On 7 June 2023, Gleeson J directed that, pursuant to r 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), the writ of summons was not to be issued or filed without the leave of a Justice first had and obtained by the applicant. This ex parte application for leave to issue of file that writ of summons is supported by an affidavit sworn on 8 July 2023, to which is annexed a number of exhibits including another affidavit sworn on 3 July 2023 and another writ of summons dates 3 July 2023.

I have read the applicant’s affidavits, which also effectively include the applicant’s submissions.  The proposed writ of summons lists seven defendants:  the State of Victoria, Court Services Victoria, Victoria Police, Wayss Ltd, Mornington Peninsula Shire Council, Parliament of Victoria, and Peninsula Health.

The basis upon which the applicant’s proposed writ of summons seeks relief in the original jurisdiction of this Court may be described as damage for injury, damage and loss, resulting from an alleged breach of the defendant’s statutory duties and their negligence, by discriminating against the applicant in their provision of goods and services in a number of different areas or by different entities:  the Court and justice system in Victoria; by Victoria Police; housing and homelessness services; the investigation of environmental nuisance complaints; by a member of State Parliament; and the health system of Victoria.  The claims relate to the provision of goods and services to the applicant in circumstances where she is living in crisis housing, and is experiencing what she describes  as an “ongoing exposure to drug, chemical and other noxious fumes and smoke drift, seeping into [her] unit through all cracks, crevices, doors and windows, emanating from” a next door neighbour.  Against each defendant, the application seeks a declaration that the plaintiff was the subject of discrimination, general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages.  The applicant also seeks, against the first defendant, a declaration that she was the subject of harassment.

The proposed writ of summons does not disclose a basis for the relief sought. The claims described in the proposed writ of summons and supporting affidavit would be an abuse of process if the documents were filed. The proposed writ otherwise does not comply with the requirements of Pt 27 of the High Court Rules.  The documents should not be issued or filed.

Pursuant to r 13.03.1 (read with r 6.07.2) of the High Court Rules, I direct that the ex parte application for leave to issue or file the writ of summons be determined without an oral hearing.  The ex parte application for leave to issue or file the writ of summons is refused.

AT 9.28 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED