Quach v RU (No 2)

[2017] ACTSC 234

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Quach v RU (No 2)

Citation:

[2017] ACTSC 234

Hearing Dates:

27 February 2017

DecisionDate:

21 August 2017

Before:

Penfold J

Decision:

1.   The appeal is dismissed.

2.   The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs

Catchwords:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – In General and Right of Appeal – appeal from Magistrate’s decision striking out application for personal protection order as disclosing no reasonable cause of action – appellant’s registration as medical practitioner cancelled in NSW – costs orders made in favour of NSW Health Care Complaints Commission – communications from employee of NSW Health Care Complaints Commission seeking to enforce costs orders – Magistrate found communications did not constitute personal violence – no error in Magistrate’s decision to strike out appellant’s application.

Legislation Cited:

Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 (NSW), s 28

Domestic Violence and Protection Orders Act 2008 (ACT), ss 14, 46, 46(1)(b)
Health Care Complaints Act1993 (NSW), ss 90A, 98, 100
Legal Profession Uniform Law, ss 47, 48, pt 4.3

Personal Violence Act 2016 (ACT)

Domestic Violence and Protection Orders Regulation 2009 (ACT), reg 69, 69(1), 69(2), 69(3)

Cases Cited:

Brambles Holdings Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1979) 28 ALR 191

House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499;
Quach v RU (No 1) [2017] ACTSC 233

Quach v NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (No 2) [2017] NSWCA 182

Texts Cited:

Local Court Bench Book, NSW Judicial Commission, [83‑000]

Prosecution Guidelines 2007, NSW Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Guideline 23

Parties:

Michael Van Thanh Quach (Appellant)

RU (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel

Unrepresented (Appellant)

Mr J Maher; Mr R Bayliss; Mr B Thomson (Respondent)

Solicitors

Unrepresented (Appellant)

Kamy Saeedi Law as agent for NSW Crown Solicitor’s Office; ACT Government Solicitor; NSW Crown Solicitor’s Office  (Respondent)

File Number:

SCA 36 of 2016

Decision under appeal: 

Court:  ACT Magistrates Court

Before:  Magistrate Morrison

Date of Decision:         13 April 2016

Case Title:  Dr Michael Van Thanh Quach v [RU]

Court File Number:       [RO 16/177]

Introduction

1. Michael Van Thanh Quach has appealed against the decision of Magistrate Morrison dismissing his application for a personal protection order against RU.

Background

1. The application has its origin in complaints made against Mr Quach to the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC). As a result of those complaints, the HCCC brought proceedings against Mr Quach in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), and eventually his registration as a medical practitioner was cancelled. Mr Quach has challenged the processes and outcomes of the HCCC’s actions in a large number of proceedings in the NSW courts (see Quach v NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (No 2) [2017] NSWCA 182, which cites five previous cases heard in the NSW Court of Appeal and two cases between Mr Quach and the HCCC heard in the Occupational Division of NCAT, as well as cases brought by Mr Quach against the NCAT Occupational Division…