NINAN and VALUER GENERAL [2016] WASAT 38

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2016] WASAT 38
Act:	VALUATION OF LAND ACT 1978 (WA)
Case No:	DR:420/2015	Heard:	DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS
Coram:	JUSTICE J C CURTHOYS (PRESIDENT)	Delivered:	15/04/16
No of pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	The applicants' applications are dismissed under s 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA)
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	GEORGE NINAN MOLLY GEORGE VALUER GENERAL
Catchwords:	Abuse of process Baseless allegations of fraud and impropriety
Legislation:	State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 47, s 47(2), s 47(3) Valuation of Land Act 1978 (WA)
Case References:	Laurent and Commissioner of Police [2009] WASAT 254 Medical Board of Australia and Woollard [2016] WASAT 26 Ninan & Anor and Valuer General [2012] WASAT 248 Ninan and Valuer General [2014] WASAT 93
Orders	1. The applicants' application is dismissed under s 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA).,2. The respondent is to file submissions for costs by 22 April 2016. ,3. The applicants are to file submissions in response by 29 April 2016.
Summary	The applicants objected to the unimproved value determined by the Valuer General for two properties for the 20142015 assessment year. ,On 15 November 2015, Mr George Ninan, on behalf of the applicants, requested the Valuer General to refer the valuation of the properties to the Tribunal for review. ,The applicants have previously sought review of the unimproved value and gross rental value valuations for the properties as well as other properties. In the previous applications, the applicants had alleged fraud and impropriety against the Valuer General and others.,In their previous applications before the Tribunal it had been made absolutely clear to the applicants that their allegations of fraud and impropriety constituted an abuse of process.,In the present applications, the applicants once again alleged fraud and impropriety against the Valuer General and others.,The Tribunal determined that the applicants' applications were an abuse of process in that they sought to pursue allegations that are outside those of the Tribunal's jurisdiction; and an abuse of process in that the applicants used the Tribunal's proceedings to make very serious allegations which are completely baseless.,The applicants' applications are dismissed pursuant to s 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA).

JURISDICTION : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT : VALUATION OF LAND ACT 1978 (WA) CITATION : NINAN and VALUER GENERAL [2016] WASAT 38 MEMBER : JUSTICE J C CURTHOYS (PRESIDENT) HEARD : DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS DELIVERED : 15 APRIL 2016 FILE NO/S : DR 420 of 2015

DR 421 of 2015

BETWEEN : GEORGE NINAN

First Applicant

MOLLY GEORGE

Second Applicant

AND

VALUER GENERAL

Respondent

Catchwords:

Abuse of process - Baseless allegations of fraud and impropriety

Legislation:

State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 47, s 47(2), s 47(3)

Valuation of Land Act 1978 (WA)

Result:

The applicants' applications are dismissed under s 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA)

Summary of Tribunal's decision:

The applicants objected to…

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 NINAN and VALUER GENERAL

Details

AGLC: NINAN and VALUER GENERAL [2016] WASAT 38
Case: [2016] WASAT 38
Decision Date: 15 APRIL 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Ninan and Valuer General, brought their application to the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The applicants sought a declaration that the proceedings brought against them by the respondent were an abuse of process. The proceedings against the applicants were brought under the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) and involved allegations of fraud and impropriety in relation to the applicants' conduct in their professional capacity. The applicants argued that the proceedings were brought with no reasonable prospect of success and were an abuse of the court process.

The court was required to consider whether the proceedings brought against the applicants were an abuse of process. The court considered the relevant law and principles in relation to abuse of process claims and the standard of proof required. The court also considered the evidence and submissions presented by both parties.

The court found that the applicants had not established that the proceedings against them were an abuse of process. The court held that the applicants had failed to demonstrate that the proceedings were brought with no reasonable prospect of success or that there was a significant risk of unfairness to the applicants. The court also found that the applicants had not established that the proceedings were brought for an improper purpose. The court dismissed the applicants' applications and made orders under section 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA).

Orders

Orders of the court

The applicants' applications are dismissed under s 47 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA)

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.