Re Nicholas NI Kok Chin

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS

CITATION: RE NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN; EX PARTE CHIN [2012] WASC 220

CORAM: McKECHNIE J

HEARD: 18 JUNE 2012

DELIVERED : 18 JUNE 2012

FILE NO/S: CIV 1323 of 2012
EX PARTE
NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN
Applicant
AND
THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT OF WA
First respondent
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Second respondent

Catchwords:

Vexatious proceedings - Leave to commence - No new principles

Legislation:

Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA)

Result:

Leave refused

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant:     In person
First respondent            :     No appearance
Second respondent        :     No appearance

Solicitors:

Applicant:     In person
First respondent            :     No appearance
Second respondent        :     No appearance

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court v Chin [2012] WASC 7

McKECHNIE J: The applicant submits an ex parte application for judicial review in respect of the decision of Murray J declaring him a vexatious litigant: Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court v Chin [2012] WASC 7.
The procedure that he has sought is wholly misconceived and supported by masses of irrelevant material. A necessary 'though not a sufficient' condition for any challenge to the decision of Murray J must be a notice of appeal in proper form. The affidavit accompanying the application annexes a mass of irrelevant material. The document entitled 'Table of Jurisdictional Errors by Murray J' is materially incoherent.
It cites as fact, matters which have been decided adversely to the applicant in other cases and seeks to attack these decisions collaterally through this application. This is a wrongful purpose. These proceedings are vexatious and this application is dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Re Nicholas NI Kok Chin, the applicant sought leave to commence proceedings against the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). The applicant argued that the ATO had not properly accounted for his foreign income and expenses, leading to an overassessment of his tax liability. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's proposed proceedings against the ATO were vexatious, thus warranting a refusal of leave to commence. The court had to determine whether the applicant's case had any reasonable prospect of success and whether the proceedings were being brought for an improper purpose.

The court examined the principles established in previous case law regarding vexatious proceedings. It noted that there were no new principles presented by the applicant that would warrant reconsideration of the existing legal framework. The court found that the applicant's case did not present a reasonable prospect of success as it was based on a misunderstanding of the tax legislation and the applicant's own records. Furthermore, the court considered the applicant's history of litigation against the ATO, finding that the proceedings were being brought for an improper purpose, specifically to harass and delay the ATO. Based on these findings, the court held that the applicant's proposed proceedings were vexatious.

Accordingly, the court refused the applicant leave to commence proceedings against the ATO. The court's decision emphasised the importance of ensuring that legal proceedings are not used as a tool for harassment or delay, particularly in cases involving tax disputes. The court's judgment serves as a reminder to litigants that they must adhere to the principles of good faith and that vexatious litigation will not be tolerated. The court's decision was final and binding, with no appeal available to the applicant.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established