Re Skyring - [2014] QSC 166

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Re Skyring [2014] QSC 166

PARTIES:

ALAN GEORGE SKYRING

(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

BS4625/14

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Application

DELIVERED ON:

28 July 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 May 2014

JUDGE:

Alan Wilson J

ORDER:

Application refused

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MATTERS – VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS AND PROCEEDINGS – where the applicant has been declared a vexatious litigant – where the applicant seeks leave to institute proceedings under section 11 of the Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld) – where, if leave is granted, the applicant seeks to rectify an error of law in an earlier case – where, secondly, the applicant seeks to set aside the original order categorising him as a vexatious litigant – where, thirdly, the applicant seeks the intervention of the Attorney-General pursuant to notice of constitutional matters and thereafter that the proceedings be moved to the High Court – where, fourthly, the applicant seeks to claim compensation for the ‘anguish, pain and suffering’ caused by the previous proceedings he has been involved in – where, fifthly, the applicant seeks judicial review of a magistrate’s order convicting him of a speeding fine – whether each proposed application would be vexatious

Australia Act 1986 (Cth)
Australia Acts (Requests) Act 1986 (Qld)
Australian Constitution, s 115
Currency Act 1965 (Cth)
Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld)
Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 222
Queensland Constitution, s 53
Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), s 11, s 12(1)(b)

Clampett v Attorney-General (Qld) [2013] QCA 325, considered
Clampett v Hill & Ors [2007] QCA 394, considered
Clampett v Kerslake (Electoral Commissioner of Qld) [2009] QCA 104, considered
Sharples v Arnison [2002] 2 Qd R 444, considered
Re Skyring [1995] QSC 55, considered
Re Skyring [2013] QSC 197, considered
Re Skyring [2014] QSC 28, considered
Re Skyring [2014] QSC 61, considered
Re Skyring [2014] QSC 89, considered
Re Skyring’s Application (No 2) (1985) 59 ALJR 561, considered
R v Minister for Justice and Attorney-General (Qld); Ex parte Skyring [1986] FC 9, considered
Skyring v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth (unreported, 5/83, 19 August 1983, BC8321370), considered
Skyring v Cooper & Anor [2014] QSC 103, considered

COUNSEL:

Mr Skyring appeared on his own behalf

SOLICITORS:

Mr Skyring appeared on his own behalf

Wilson J: Mr Skyring, who has been classified as a vexatious litigant under the Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), applies for leave to bring proceedings. Section 11 of the VLPA compels Mr Skyring to seek that leave before he brings any action in the courts.

As he frankly admitted in documents he filed in this matter,[1] this is another in a series of applications he has regularly brought in recent times of, essentially, an identical nature.
[1]Mr Skyring’s ‘supplementary affidavit (no 1)’ filed 19 May 2014

Since 1 July 2013 Mr Skyring has, in fact, brought 17 applications seeking much the same relief he pursues here. They have been considered and…

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 Skyring

Details

AGLC: Re Skyring [2014] QSC 166
Case: [2014] QSC 166
Decision Date: 28 July 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant in the matter sought leave to institute proceedings under the Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), after being declared a vexatious litigant. The court considered several applications, including rectifying an error of law in an earlier case, setting aside the order categorising him as a vexatious litigant, seeking intervention from the Attorney-General, claiming compensation for anguish and suffering, and seeking judicial review of a conviction for a speeding fine. The court was required to determine whether each of these proposed applications would be considered vexatious.

The court found that the applicant’s proposed applications were vexatious. The court observed that the applicant had been declared a vexatious litigant for a reason, and that each of the proposed applications was an abuse of process. The court considered that the applicant had an extensive history of making numerous vexatious applications, and that each of the proposed applications was without merit. The court found that the applicant’s conduct was vexatious and oppressive, and that it would be in the interests of justice to refuse the application.

In light of the findings, the court refused the application. The court found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that any of the proposed applications had any reasonable prospect of success, and that each of the applications was an abuse of process. The court considered that the applicant’s conduct was vexatious and oppressive, and that it would be in the interests of justice to refuse the application. The court made no orders in relation to the applicant’s proposed applications.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application refused

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.

CITATION:	Re Skyring [2014] QSC 166
PARTIES:	ALAN GEORGE SKYRING (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	BS4625/14
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Application
DELIVERED ON:	28 July 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	29 May 2014
JUDGE:	Alan Wilson J
ORDER:	Application refused
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MATTERS – VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS AND PROCEEDINGS – where the applicant has been declared a vexatious litigant – where the applicant seeks leave to institute proceedings under section 11 of the Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld) – where, if leave is granted, the applicant seeks to rectify an error of law in an earlier case – where, secondly, the applicant seeks to set aside the original order categorising him as a vexatious litigant – where, thirdly, the applicant seeks the intervention of the Attorney-General pursuant to notice of constitutional matters and thereafter that the proceedings be moved to the High Court – where, fourthly, the applicant seeks to claim compensation for the ‘anguish, pain and suffering’ caused by the previous proceedings he has been involved in – where, fifthly, the applicant seeks judicial review of a magistrate’s order convicting him of a speeding fine – whether each proposed application would be vexatious Australia Act 1986 (Cth) Australia Acts (Requests) Act 1986 (Qld) Australian Constitution, s 115 Currency Act 1965 (Cth) Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 222 Queensland Constitution, s 53 Vexatious Litigants Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), s 11, s 12(1)(b) Clampett v Attorney-General (Qld) [2013] QCA 325, considered Clampett v Hill & Ors [2007] QCA 394, considered Clampett v Kerslake (Electoral Commissioner of Qld) [2009] QCA 104, considered Sharples v Arnison [2002] 2 Qd R 444, considered Re Skyring [1995] QSC 55, considered Re Skyring [2013] QSC 197, considered Re Skyring [2014] QSC 28, considered Re Skyring [2014] QSC 61, considered Re Skyring [2014] QSC 89, considered Re Skyring’s Application (No 2) (1985) 59 ALJR 561, considered R v Minister for Justice and Attorney-General (Qld); Ex parte Skyring [1986] FC 9, considered Skyring v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth (unreported, 5/83, 19 August 1983, BC8321370), considered Skyring v Cooper & Anor [2014] QSC 103, considered
COUNSEL:	Mr Skyring appeared on his own behalf
SOLICITORS:	Mr Skyring appeared on his own behalf