Skyring v Dixon

[2010] QSC 150

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Skyring v Dixon [2010] QSC 150

PARTIES:

ALAN GEORGE SKYRING
(applicant)

v

JEFFREY ARTHUR DIXSON
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

3629 of 2010

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

21 April 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

21 April 2010

JUDGE:

Fryberg J

ORDERS:

Application dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

Procedure – Supreme Court procedure – Queensland – Jurisdiction and generally – Generally – Applicant declared vexatious litigant – Application to institute a proceeding – Futile and hopeless arguments – Application dismissed

Judicial Review Act (Qld)
Vexatious Litigants Act 1981 (Qld)
Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005 (Qld), s 16

Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (2010) 239 CLR 531; [2010] HCA 1, cited

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Ex parte

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Ex parte

HIS HONOUR:  This is an application by Alan George Skyring for leave to institute a proceeding that is subject to an order to a vexatious proceedings order, in effect prohibiting him from so doing.

Mr Skyring is and has, for many years, been a declared vexatious litigant under the Vexatious Litigants Act 1981, which has been repealed by the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005, but the declarations continue in effect by reason of s 16 of the 2005 Act.

Mr Skyring has supported his application with an affidavit setting out the occasions on which he has applied for leave under either Act.  In fact, the occasions are all under the previous Act, and they are listed, or more accurately, described, over some almost three pages of his affidavit.  It is unnecessary to describe them here in detail.

Mr Skyring seeks to have the leave because he wishes to commence proceedings by way of judicial review, or more accurately by way of application for a prerogative writ, to challenge a decision in the Magistrate's Court under the TORUM Act.  The purpose of the challenge, he told me, is to raise two very important points: first, a challenge to the whole order of Government in Queensland, and perhaps Australia, and second, to the legality of the currency of Australia. 

He submits that the Judicial Review Act itself is invalid and that he can by the old prerogative writs challenge both the decision in the Magistrate's Court and the order made against him under the Vexatious Litigants Act.

His foundation for bringing the application now is his understanding of the decision of the High Court given earlier this year, and the reasons which were advanced for that decision more recently, in Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales [2010] HCA 1.

Mr Skyring did not refer me to any particular part of the judgment in that case, but relied upon the summary of it which he had obtained from a commentary on the case.  That summary, as I understand it, is that the case decides that a State Parliament may not, by legislation, remove…