Mohareb v Palmer (No 3)

In *Mohareb v Palmer (No 3)*, the applicant, Nader Mohareb, who was subject to a vexatious proceedings order, sought leave to appeal against orders made by the Common Law Division on 7 August and 2 September 2019, and subsequently sought to vary orders made on appeal. The proceedings involved an application for leave to appeal a vexatious proceedings order and a notice of motion seeking to vary orders made on appeal.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant required leave to file a summons seeking leave to appeal the vexatious proceedings order, and whether leave was required to file a notice of motion seeking to vary the orders made on appeal. The court also considered the timeliness of the notice of motion, which was filed outside the 14-day period specified by rule 36.16 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW), and the court's power to extend time.

The court determined that leave was required to institute proceedings challenging the vexatious proceedings order, and granted the applicant leave to do so retrospectively from 14 October 2019. However, the court found the subsequent notice of motion to vary the appeal orders to be incompetent, dismissing it. The court noted that the notice of motion was filed outside the prescribed time limit and did not demonstrate grounds for an extension of time.

Consequently, the court made orders granting the applicant leave to institute the application for leave to appeal the vexatious proceedings order, effective from 14 October 2019. The court also ordered that certain correspondence be marked as exhibits and dismissed the applicant's notice of motion as incompetent.