Re Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA); Ex Parte Ruba

The parties in this case were the applicant and the respondents. The applicant sought leave to file and issue a writ of summons against the respondents, which included the Legal Practice Board (LPB) and its committees, as well as the Attorney General of Western Australia. The nature of the dispute was whether the applicant's writ disclosed a cause of action against the LPB and its committees for their alleged failures in performing statutory duties. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The legal issues that the court had to decide included whether the Crown could be sued for the tortious actions of its servants or agents, including for the failures of its servants or agents in performing statutory duties. The court also had to determine whether the LPB and its committees were agents of the Crown and whether they were entitled to the immunities enjoyed by the Crown. Another issue was whether the allegations made by the applicant were sufficient to establish a cause of action against the LPB and its committees.

The court held that it was now accepted that the Crown could be sued for the tortious actions of its servants or agents, including for the failures of its servants or agents in performing statutory duties. The liability of the Crown rested in vicarious liability. The court also held that the extent to which a body corporate created by a statute could be said to be an agent of the Crown or a representative of the Crown was determined by reference to the statute creating the statutory body. The court found that the LPB and its committees were not agents of the Crown and were not entitled to the immunities enjoyed by the Crown. The court further held that the allegations made by the applicant were sufficient to establish a cause of action against the LPB and its committees.

The final orders of the court were that the applicant's application for leave to file and issue a writ of summons against the respondents was dismissed. The court held that the writ did not disclose a cause of action against the LPB and its committees.