Snook v Department of Housing

In the matter of Snook v Department of Housing, the respondent, the Department of Housing, sought an interlocutory injunction in the Supreme Court to prevent the applicant from entering the premises they had previously occupied under a residential tenancy agreement. The applicant had been served with a notice of abandonment by the Department of Housing, pursuant to section 76A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA). The respondent argued that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to grant relief because the Magistrates Court had exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the Act. The applicant sought relief in the Supreme Court, having proceedings for substantially the same relief already commenced in the Magistrates Court. The legal issues before the court were whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to grant relief and whether proceedings for substantially the same relief could be commenced in two different courts.

The court found that the Magistrates Court had exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA), as provided for in section 12A of the Act. The court held that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to grant relief in this matter, as the relief sought arose under the Act. The court also found that the applicant's proceedings in the Supreme Court were an abuse of process, as proceedings for substantially the same relief were already commenced in the Magistrates Court. The court dismissed the application and found that the applicant's proceedings in the Supreme Court were an abuse of process.

The court's final orders were that the application for an interlocutory injunction be dismissed and that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the application. The court held that the applicant's proceedings in the Supreme Court were an abuse of process and that the Magistrates Court had exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA).