Patsalis v New South Wales

In *Patsalis v New South Wales*, the applicant, a prisoner, sought to challenge the conditions of his incarceration. The primary dispute concerned whether the applicant, as a convicted felon, was required to obtain leave from the court before commencing civil proceedings under section 4 of the *Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981* (NSW). The proceedings involved seeking relief under section 69 of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW) or alternative declarations and injunctions. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal included whether the *Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981* applied to proceedings seeking relief under public law principles, such as those relating to the terms and conditions of imprisonment. The court also considered the availability of a mandatory injunction for threatened negligent conduct and whether the Supreme Court's jurisdiction was limited by the principle of attainder. Further issues related to the interpretation of the *Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981*, particularly in light of amendments and repealed provisions, and the appropriate costs orders for the proceedings.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the requirement for leave under section 4 of the *Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981* did not extend to applications for relief in accordance with public law principles, such as those concerning the conditions of imprisonment. The court held that the applicant, despite being convicted of a serious indictable offence, was not required to obtain leave to commence proceedings seeking relief under section 69 of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* or alternative declarations and injunctions related to his imprisonment. The court also addressed the availability of quia timet relief, distinguishing it from judicial review of discretionary decisions.

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal concerning the requirement for leave to commence proceedings. It set aside the primary judge's order and declared that the applicant did not require leave under the *Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981* to commence proceedings seeking relief regarding the terms and conditions of his imprisonment. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs of that proceeding, excluding costs associated with the constitutional issue. Applications for leave to appeal from other interlocutory decisions were dismissed, with varying costs orders made against the applicant.