Re NYY - [2025] QSC 29

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Re NYY [2025] QSC 29

PARTIES:

NYY

(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court (Brisbane)

DELIVERED ON:

24 February 2025

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 February 2025

JUDGE:

Justice Freeburn

ORDER:

The application for leave pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 is dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY - VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS, PROCEEDINGS AND RELATED MATTER – VEXATIOUS LITIGANT – where the applicant has tried to file various documents – where the registrar has not permitted the applicant to file the documents pursuant to rule 15 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rule 1999 (Queensland) – where the applicant applies to the court for leave to file the documents – where the applicant seeks ‘urgent orders’ – where the applicant makes reference to a risk of sexual and other harm to three children – whether the claim is vexatious and lacking proper legal basis

PROCEDURE – STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY – JURISDICTION – GENERALLY – where the applicant applies to the court for leave to file the documents pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Queensland) – where there were previously proceedings in the Magistrates Court, District Court and the Federal Circuit Court – where the applicant ultimately seeks a variation of the orders made previously by the Federal Circuit Court – where the applicant states the court should exercise its parens patriae jurisdiction – where the applicant seeks a judicial review of the previous decisions – whether the proposed claims are within the jurisdiction of this court

COUNSEL:

The applicant is self-represented.

SOLICITORS:

nil

The applicant is self-represented. She has tried to file various documents in the registry, but the Registrar has refused to permit the filing of the documents pursuant to rule 15 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Queensland).[1] The result is that, pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the UCPR, the applicant now applies to the court for leave to file the documents.
[1]That was directed by the court pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the UCPR.
It is necessary to anonymise the parties because of the nature of the allegations that the applicant wishes to ventilate, and because some of those allegations involve her children.
The applicant’s application[2] came before the court in the Applications List on 18 February 2025. On that day, the applicant made oral submissions on why she should be permitted to proceed with her application, and she gave me her written submissions, together with two lever arch files full of material, and an envelope which included some confidential material.
[2]The originating application that was filed – for ‘leave to file’ – was filed on 31 January 2025. The application is supported by a lengthy affidavit affirmed on 6 December 2024.
Because of the exigencies of the Applications List, it was appropriate to hear the applicant, to take the material, and to reserve my decision so…

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.

Continue reading Re NYY

Details

AGLC: Re NYY [2025] QSC 29
Case: [2025] QSC 29
Decision Date: 24 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant in this case sought leave to file documents in the Supreme Court, pursuant to rule 15 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rule 1999 (Queensland), which had previously been refused by the registrar. The applicant's application was brought in the context of previous proceedings in the Magistrates Court, District Court, and the Federal Circuit Court. The applicant sought urgent orders regarding the risk of harm to three children in the custody of the fifth respondent (the applicant's former husband) and a variation of orders made by the Federal Circuit Court. The applicant argued that the court should exercise its parens patriae jurisdiction and sought a judicial review of the previous decisions.
The court was required to determine whether the application was vexatious and lacked proper legal basis. The court also needed to decide whether the proposed claims fell within its jurisdiction. In particular, the court had to assess whether the applicant's claims were an attempt to relitigate issues that had already been determined in previous proceedings. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the applicant's claims were based on proper evidence and whether they warranted urgent attention.
The court found that the application was vexatious and lacked a proper legal basis. The applicant had attempted to relitigate issues that had already been determined in previous proceedings. Furthermore, the applicant's claims were not supported by proper evidence, and there was no indication that the children were presently in danger. The court held that the application was an abuse of process and dismissed the application for leave to file the documents. The court also noted that the applicant's claims were outside the jurisdiction of the court, as they sought to vary orders made by the Federal Circuit Court, which was not within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
The application for leave pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 is dismissed. The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application for leave pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 is dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

The orders sought in the applicant’s (proposed) ‘initiating application’ are then set out in some detail. Under the heading “Urgent Orders” the applicant seeks the following: “1.The Supreme Court exercise jurisdiction in parens patriae in the Equity division.2.That all Risk of Sexual Harm and other Child Harm evidence put before the Court by the Applicant be admitted and immediately assessed for risk of harm to [names of children and their dates of birth deleted] while in the custody of the Fifth Respondent [the applicant’s former husband].3.Orders are made in equity to immediately remove the… Children from the Fifth Respondent and place them in the safe, protective care of the Applicant.NOTE: This Application is being made on instruction from Justice Mullins during Show Cause hearing on 23 January 2025 at 2.30pm.4.Filing fees are waived in lieu of credit for the Hearing held 23 January 2025 as requested of the Registrar by Justice Mullins during Show Cause hearing on 23 January 2025 at 2.30pm. 5.The Court grant Orders for substitute of service by email to the Parties.6.That the proceedings are conducted with Trauma-Informed Judicial Practice:a. in an unbiased, non-prejudicial respectful manner toward the Applicant accounting for her Trauma (emotional) disability:b. without any further injury or insult to the Applicant by Judges of the Court, or Respondents; including verbal abuse, harassment, undertones or rude remarksc. using informal, conversational style for hearingsd. assistance by the Court to understand the Court process and procedurese. complete consideration of her PTSD, Anxiety and Major Depressive Disorder be accounted for in respect of the conduct of the proceedings,f. a relaxing of Rules of Conduct wherever necessaryg. the right to present her case in plain English, verbally or in writingh. clear legible instructions provided to all Parties in writing or by Court Order” [emphasis added] Of course, the most concerning aspect of that list of proposed orders is the reference to the risk of sexual and other harm to the three children. From other material it is clear that the three children are the children of the applicant and her former husband. However, it is important to note that what seems to be sought is that the risk of harm be “immediately assessed”. The ‘urgent orders’ proposed by the application appear to envisage a proceeding in which a risk assessment will be conducted, but subject to certain specified procedural modifications, and on the basis that the children are to be immediately placed in the care of the applicant. Importantly, there is no claim here that the three children are in present danger. If they were presently in danger, then it would be appropriate for the applicant to call the police or the Department of Child Safety. Instead, the idea seems to be that there be a proceeding in this court which has, as its object, a ‘risk assessment’. As will be seen, there is also no evidence identified by the applicant in her application that establishes that the children are presently in harm’s way.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Re NYY [2025] QSC 29
PARTIES:	NYY (applicant)
FILE NO/S:
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court (Brisbane)
DELIVERED ON:	24 February 2025
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	18 February 2025
JUDGE:	Justice Freeburn
ORDER:	The application for leave pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 is dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY - VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS, PROCEEDINGS AND RELATED MATTER – VEXATIOUS LITIGANT – where the applicant has tried to file various documents – where the registrar has not permitted the applicant to file the documents pursuant to rule 15 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rule 1999 (Queensland) – where the applicant applies to the court for leave to file the documents – where the applicant seeks ‘urgent orders’ – where the applicant makes reference to a risk of sexual and other harm to three children – whether the claim is vexatious and lacking proper legal basis PROCEDURE – STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY – JURISDICTION – GENERALLY – where the applicant applies to the court for leave to file the documents pursuant to rule 15(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Queensland) – where there were previously proceedings in the Magistrates Court, District Court and the Federal Circuit Court – where the applicant ultimately seeks a variation of the orders made previously by the Federal Circuit Court – where the applicant states the court should exercise its parens patriae jurisdiction – where the applicant seeks a judicial review of the previous decisions – whether the proposed claims are within the jurisdiction of this court
COUNSEL:	The applicant is self-represented.
SOLICITORS:	nil