Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 4) - [2022] FCA 358

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 4) [2022] FCA 358

File number: WAD 226 of 2021

Judgment of: COLVIN J

Date of judgment: 6 April 2022

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37AO

Cases cited: Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 3) [2022] FCA 267

Division: General Division

Registry: Western Australia

National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction

Number of paragraphs: 7

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant did not appear

Counsel for the Respondents: The Respondents did not appear

ORDERS

WAD 226 of 2021

BETWEEN:
CELESTINE OGBONNA

Applicant

AND:
CTI LOGISTICS LIMITED (ACN 008 778 925)

First Respondent

NEIL RASPA

Second Respondent

JUSTIN PETER SIMS

Third Respondent

THOMAS PETER WILSON
Fourth Respondent

DAVID ANDERSON MELLOR
Fifth Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

COLVIN J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 APRIL 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.In respect of the request for leave dated 1 April 2022, the request for leave is refused.
2.Order 7 of the orders made 7 February 2022 is varied to read:
Until further order, save for any minutes of orders to be considered at the case management hearing and any application pursuant to this order, no party shall file any further application in these proceedings or other document without prior leave of the Court, such leave to be sought by filing an ex parte interlocutory application and any submissions in support of the application for leave.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
COLVIN J:

Mr Ogbonna seeks leave to file a notice to admit. In Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 3) [2022] FCA 267 I explained the circumstances in which the requirement for leave was imposed. In those reasons, I also explained why I refused to grant leave to Mr Ogbonna to file a number of documents including a notice to admit: at [4].
The new proposed notice is similar in form to the proposed notice for which leave has been refused. It is sought on the basis of a claim that the respondents' application for orders declaring Mr Ogbonna to be a vexatious litigant is frivolous, vexatious and oppressive because Mr Ogbonna maintains that he has presented evidence to show that he is not a vexatious litigant. He also says that an order under s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) should not be made without giving the person concerned an opportunity to be heard.
Orders were made for the respondents' application to be listed after a date in April. Those orders provide for Mr Ogbonna to file submissions by 8 April 2022. The application has now been listed for hearing on 23 May 2022. It is not the case that it is contemplated that an order under s 37AO will be made without affording Mr Ogbonna an opportunity to be heard.
The new proposed notice, like the previous proposed notice, seeks admissions as 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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 4) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2022] FCA 358
Decision Date: 6 April 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 4) involved the applicant, Ogbonna, and the respondent, CTI Logistics Limited. The matter was before the Federal Court of Australia and pertained to a request for leave to file further documents in the proceedings, specifically regarding the ongoing litigation. The application was made on the basis that the applicant had a new matter to bring to the court’s attention. The legal issues that the court had to address included whether the applicant should be granted leave to file further documents in the proceedings and if so, under what conditions such leave should be granted. The court considered the nature of the proposed documents, the stage of the proceedings, and the history of the litigation between the parties. In its judgment, the court refused the request for leave, noting that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for the additional filings. Furthermore, the court imposed stringent conditions on any future applications to file documents, requiring prior leave to be sought through an ex parte interlocutory application. This decision reflects the court's intent to manage the proceedings efficiently and to prevent unnecessary prolongation of the litigation. The court varied Order 7 of the orders made on 7 February 2022, stipulating that no party shall file any further application in the proceedings or other document without prior leave of the Court. The court's final orders included the refusal of the request for leave dated 1 April 2022 and the variation of Order 7 to impose the aforementioned conditions on future filings.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. In respect of the request for leave dated 1 April 2022, the request for leave is refused.

2. Order 7 of the orders made 7 February 2022 is varied to read:

Until further order, save for any minutes of orders to be considered at the case management hearing and any application pursuant to this order, no party shall file any further application in these proceedings or other document without prior leave of the Court, such leave to be sought by filing an ex parte interlocutory application and any submissions in support of the application for leave.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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.

File number:	WAD 226 of 2021
Judgment of:	COLVIN J
Date of judgment:	6 April 2022
Legislation:	Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37AO
Cases cited:	Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Limited (No 3) [2022] FCA 267
Division:	General Division
Registry:	Western Australia
National Practice Area:	Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs:	7
Date of hearing:	Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant did not appear
Counsel for the Respondents:	The Respondents did not appear

ORDER MADE BY:	COLVIN J
DATE OF ORDER:	6 APRIL 2022