Scott & Munayallan (No 16) - [2023] FedCFamC1F 1007

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Scott & Munayallan (No 16) [2023] FedCFamC1F 1007

File number(s): SYC 59 of 2010

Judgment of: ALDRIDGE J

Date of judgment: 24 November 2023

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application in a Proceeding to declare the respondent a vexatious litigant – Where the respondent has been declared a vexatious litigant in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and the Federal Court of Australia – Findings in previous proceedings give rise to an issue estoppel – Parties are relevantly identical – Alternatively an abuse of process to contest the previous findings – Whether to exercise discretion to make an order – Respondent declared vexatious litigant – Order extended to any application signed by the respondent even if it is in the name of another – Respondent to pay the applicants’ costs.

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 102QB

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37AO

Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) s 8

Cases cited:
Scott & Munayallan (No 14) [2023] FedCFamC1F 772

Scott & Munayallan (No 15) [2023] FedCFamC1F 838

Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 507

Division: Division 1 First Instance

Number of paragraphs: 25

Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

Place: In chambers

Solicitor for the Applicants: ERA Legal

The Respondent: Litigant in person
ORDERS

SYC 59 of 2010

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:
MR AB AS LIQUIDATOR OF I PTY LTD (IN LIQ)

First Applicant

I PTY LTD (IN LIQ)

Second Applicant

AND:
MR MATTEN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

ALDRIDGE J

DATE OF ORDER:

24 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to s 102QB(2)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), Mr Matten, by himself or by his servants or agents, is prohibited from instituting any proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, or filing any application or originating process in any existing proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, either in his own name or in the name of any other person against any of following:
(a)Mr AB;
(b)I Pty Ltd (in liq);
(c)any current or former director, employee, agent or consultant of the firm AJ Financial Services; and
(d)any current or former director, employee, agent or consultant of ERA Legal,

relating to or in any way connected with the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq), without leave of the Court first obtained.
2.Pursuant to s 102QB(2)(a) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), any other proceedings commenced on or after 21 September 2023 by or on behalf of Mr Matten, relating to or in any way connected with the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq), are permanently stayed.
3.For the purpose of Orders 1 and 2 above, Mr Matten is taken to do something in the name of another person or company if he signs any document in the name of, or purportedly in the name of, or purportedly…

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 Scott & Munayallan (No 16)

Details

AGLC: Scott & Munayallan (No 16) [2023] FedCFamC1F 1007
Case: [2023] FedCFamC1F 1007
Decision Date: 24 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application by Mr AB, as liquidator of I Pty Ltd (in liq), and I Pty Ltd (in liq) against Mr Matten. The applicants sought to have Mr Matten declared a vexatious litigant in relation to proceedings concerning the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq). Mr Matten had already been declared a vexatious litigant by the Supreme Court of New South Wales and the Federal Court of Australia in previous proceedings. The applicants argued that the previous findings gave rise to an issue estoppel, or alternatively, that it would be an abuse of process for Mr Matten to contest these findings in the current proceedings. The court was required to determine whether to exercise its discretion to make an order declaring Mr Matten a vexatious litigant under section 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

The court found that the previous findings of vexatiotious conduct by Mr Matten in other courts created an issue estoppel, as the parties and subject matter were essentially the same. The court held that it would be an abuse of process for Mr Matten to contest these findings in the current proceedings. The court noted the seriousness of the allegations of vexatious conduct and the impact on the applicants, and considered it appropriate to exercise its discretion to declare Mr Matten a vexatious litigant. The court made an order prohibiting Mr Matten from instituting or filing any proceedings or applications in relation to the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq) without leave of the court, and staying any proceedings commenced by Mr Matten after a specified date. The order also extended to any applications signed by Mr Matten, even if they were in the name of another person. Finally, the court ordered Mr Matten to pay the applicants' costs.

The court's order declared Mr Matten a vexatious litigant in relation to the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq), and imposed restrictions on his ability to initiate or continue proceedings without leave of the court. The order also included provisions to prevent Mr Matten from circumventing the restrictions by using the names of other persons or companies. The court's decision reflected its concern about vexatious litigation and its willingness to take steps to prevent it from impacting on the applicants in this case.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 59 of 2010

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MR AB AS LIQUIDATOR OF I PTY LTD (IN LIQ)

First Applicant

I PTY LTD (IN LIQ)

Second Applicant

AND:

MR MATTEN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

ALDRIDGE J

DATE OF ORDER:

24 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 102QB(2)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), Mr Matten, by himself or by his servants or agents, is prohibited from instituting any proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, or filing any application or originating process in any existing proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, either in his own name or in the name of any other person against any of following:

(a) Mr AB;

(b) I Pty Ltd (in liq);

(d) any current or former director, employee, agent or consultant of ERA Legal,

relating to or in any way connected with the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq), without leave of the Court first obtained.

2. Pursuant to s 102QB(2)(a) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), any other proceedings commenced on or after 21 September 2023 by or on behalf of Mr Matten, relating to or in any way connected with the winding up of I Pty Ltd (in liq), are permanently stayed.

3. For the purpose of Orders 1 and 2 above, Mr Matten is taken to do something in the name of another person or company if he signs any document in the name of, or purportedly in the name of, or purportedly on behalf of, any other person or company, or files, or causes to be filed, any application with a court or tribunal, or makes any oral application to any court or tribunal in the name of, or purportedly on behalf of, any other person or company.

4. Mr Matten pay the applicants' costs of this Application in a Proceeding, as agreed or as assessed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

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.

File number(s):	SYC 59 of 2010
Judgment of:	ALDRIDGE J
Date of judgment:	24 November 2023
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application in a Proceeding to declare the respondent a vexatious litigant – Where the respondent has been declared a vexatious litigant in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and the Federal Court of Australia – Findings in previous proceedings give rise to an issue estoppel – Parties are relevantly identical – Alternatively an abuse of process to contest the previous findings – Whether to exercise discretion to make an order – Respondent declared vexatious litigant – Order extended to any application signed by the respondent even if it is in the name of another – Respondent to pay the applicants’ costs.
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 102QB Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37AO Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) s 8
Cases cited:	Scott & Munayallan (No 14) [2023] FedCFamC1F 772 Scott & Munayallan (No 15) [2023] FedCFamC1F 838 Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 507
Division:	Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs:	25
Date of hearing:	Determined on the papers
Place:	In chambers
Solicitor for the Applicants:	ERA Legal
The Respondent:	Litigant in person

SYC 59 of 2010
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:	MR AB AS LIQUIDATOR OF I PTY LTD (IN LIQ) First Applicant I PTY LTD (IN LIQ) Second Applicant
AND:	MR MATTEN Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	ALDRIDGE J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 NOVEMBER 2023