Tucker, In the matter of an application for leave to issue a proceeding

Michael David Tucker, the applicant, sought leave from the High Court of Australia to issue a proceeding, which was an application for appeal against a judgment of the Kalgoorlie District Court given by Judge Scott on 4 September 2015. The applicant's "Application for Appeal" was filed on 5 April 2016, outside the 28-day time limit prescribed by rule 41.02 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth) and without seeking dispensation. Furthermore, the application did not comply with rule 41.01. Justice Gordon had previously directed the Registrar to refuse to issue or file the application without the leave of a Justice.

The legal issues before the court were whether to grant the applicant leave, pursuant to rules 6.07.2 and 6.07.3, to issue the proceeding that Justice Gordon had directed the Registrar to refuse. The applicant's stated grounds for appeal, under section 73(ii) of the Commonwealth Constitution, were that the State of Western Australia was constituted using an unlawful State Constitution, asserting that the correct and lawful constitution was established by Letters Patent on 29 October 1900 by Queen Victoria, and that only the Monarch, not the Commonwealth Parliament, could change such Letters Patent.

The court found that the applicant's proposed appeal and grounds of appeal were manifestly misconceived and untenable. It was noted that it was not immediately apparent how the applicant's contentions regarding the lawfulness of the Western Australian Constitution would attract a right of appeal under section 73(ii) of the Commonwealth Constitution, particularly in the context of a conviction. The court concluded that the "Application for Appeal" was vexatious and oppressive.

Consequently, the ex parte application for leave to issue the proceeding was refused.