Schultz v Rowe

[2015] QSC 143

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Schultz v Rowe [2015] QSC 143

PARTIES:

ALISON JANE SCHULTZ

(applicant)

v
CHAD EVERETT ROWE

(respondent)

FILE NO:

No 3077 of 2015

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Civil Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

29 May 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

23 April 2015

JUDGE:

Daubney J

ORDERS:

1. The applicant has leave, pursuant to s 5(2) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (“the Act”), to apply for vexatious proceedings orders;

2. It is declared for the purposes of s 6(1)(a) of the Act that the respondent, Chad Everett Rowe, is a person who has frequently instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings in Australia;

3. It is ordered that the respondent be prohibited from instituting proceedings in Queensland (apart from an appeal against these orders) without first obtaining leave under the Act;

4.    It is ordered that the proceeding filed by the respondent against the applicant on 16 March 2015 in the Magistrates Court of Queensland (matter number 50890 of 2015) be stayed;

5.    It is ordered that the appeal filed by the respondent against the applicant on 5 November 2015 in the District Court of Queensland (matter number 4337 of 2014) be stayed.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MATTERS – VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS AND PROCEEDINGS – where the applicant has filed an application for orders under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld) – where the applicant seeks the respondent be declared a vexatious litigant under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld) – where the applicant seeks an order that the respondent be prohibited from issuing proceedings in the jurisdiction of Queensland – where the applicant seeks an order that the respondent cannot issue proceedings in the jurisdiction of Queensland without leave of the Court – whether a proceeding in the Magistrates Court of Queensland against the applicant can be stayed – whether a District Court Appeal proceeding against the applicant can be stayed.

Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), ss 5, 6, 7 and 11.

Cooper v Mbuzi [2012] QSC 105, considered
Emmanuel College v Rowe [2014] QSC 238, considered
Hambleton & Anor v Labaj [2011] QCA 17, cited
Re Cameron [1996] 2 Qd R 218, considered
Rowe v Emmanuel College [2013] QCA 326, cited
Rowe v Emmanuel College [2015] QSC 45, considered
Rowe & Schultz & Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2015] FCCA 989, cited

COUNSEL:

A Schultz appeared on her own behalf

C Rowe appeared on his own behalf
D Keane for the Attorney-General of Queensland as amicus curiae

SOLICITORS:

A Schultz appeared on her own behalf

C Rowe appeared on his own behalf
Crown Law for the Attorney-General of Queensland as amicus curiae

1. This is an application for orders under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (“VPA”).  In particular, the applicant seeks orders that:

   (a)     the respondent be declared a vexatious litigant;

   (b)the respondent be prohibited from issuing proceedings in Queensland (apart from an appeal from this matter) without prior leave of the Court;

   (c)Magistrates Court…