FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| RANA v DEAKIN UNIVERSITY | [2012] FMCA 575 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS – Claims of unlawful disability and race discrimination – respondent seeking summary dismissal of claims and/or vexatious litigant order – consideration of applicant’s claims – claims found to have no prospect of successful prosecution – consideration of whether claims vexatious – consideration of applicant’s numerous other cases – orders made as sought by respondent. |
| Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, rr.13.10, 13.11 Federal Magistrates Act 1999, s.17A Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011, ss.6, 7 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976, s.31A Disability Act 2006 Racial Discrimination Act 1975 Evidence Act 1995, s.140 Judiciary Act 1903, s.39B Bankruptcy Act 1966, ss.178, 179 Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 |
| Applicant: | RANJIT RANA |
| Respondent: | DEAKIN UNIVERSITY |
| File Number: | ADG 197 of 2011 |
| Judgment of: | Burchardt FM |
| Hearing date: | 28 May 2012 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 28 May 2012 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne (via video link to Adelaide) |
| Delivered on: | 20 July 2012 |
REPRESENTATION
| The Applicant: | In Person |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr S. Cole |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Minter Ellison Lawyers |
ORDERS
The claim made by the applicant, Mr Rana, be dismissed.
The applicant, Mr Rana, be and is hereby declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to r.13.11 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Rana v Deakin University 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2012] FMCA 575
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the statements made by Deakin University were not defamatory as they did not lower Mr Rana's reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of the public. The court reasoned that the statements were made in good faith and were based on factual information, and thus did not meet the threshold for defamation. In addition, the court found that Mr Rana's repeated litigation against the university, despite previous dismissals, indicated that he was a vexatious litigant. This status meant that the court had the discretion to dismiss his claim and impose costs against him. The court concluded that the claim should be dismissed and that Mr Rana should be declared a vexatious litigant.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The claim made by the applicant, Mr Rana, be dismissed.
2.
The applicant, Mr Rana, be and is hereby declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to r.13.11 of the
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.