Samootin v Shea

This matter concerned an application by Ms Samootin for review of decisions made by a single judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal. The proceedings involved multiple respondents, including Mr Shea, Mr Deans, various companies, Ms Wagner, Mr Holmes, the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy, and the Attorneys-General for the Commonwealth and New South Wales. The core of the dispute revolved around Ms Samootin's alleged losses and expenditures concerning properties, and her standing to pursue claims related to these matters.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether Ms Samootin had standing to appeal against certain decisions, particularly an order made by Palmer J in 2008 concerning the costs of a valuation report and directions for property sale. A further issue was whether the proceedings constituted an abuse of process, and whether a judge had erred in not applying the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Court also considered an application for removal of proceedings to the High Court under s 38(a) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), which had previously been refused by a High Court judge.

The Court reasoned that Ms Samootin lacked standing to pursue the claims, as any rights she might have had to make such claims had vested in the Official Trustee in Bankruptcy during her bankruptcy and had not revested in her upon discharge. This principle had been established in a prior appeal judgment in 2010, which was upheld by the High Court's refusal of special leave to appeal. The Court also noted that the Supreme Court of New South Wales was not an entity capable of being joined as a respondent in proceedings before it.

The applicant's notices of motion filed on 4 December 2012, 22 March 2013, and 28 May 2013 were each dismissed.