Wang v State of New South Wales (No 4)

[2020] NSWCA 171

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Wang v State of New South Wales (No 4) [2020] NSWCA 171

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Date of orders:

7 August 2020

Decision date:

07 August 2020

Before:

Macfarlan JA;
Payne JA

Decision:

Notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Catchwords:

APPEALS – notice of motion seeking to set aside orders refusing application for leave to appeal – impermissible attempt to re-agitate matters previously determined – vexatious and an abuse of process

Legislation Cited:

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 157

Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW), Pt 60

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.2

Cases Cited:

Attorney General (NSW) v Markisic [2014] NSWSC 1596

Category:

Procedural and other rulings

Parties:

Li Wang (Applicant)
State of New South Wales (First Respondent)
Colin Hodgson (Second Respondent)

Representation:

Self-represented Applicant

File Number(s):

2019/328872

 Decision under appeal 

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Citation:

[2014] NSWSC 909

[2019] NSWSC 1332

[2019] NSWSC 1599

Date of Decision:

8 July 2014
1 October 2019
21 November 2019

Before:

Harrison J
Adamson J
Harrison AsJ

File Number(s):

2013/128929
2019/227867

Judgment

1. THE COURT: On 28 July 2020 Ms Wang filed a notice of motion seeking to set aside the orders we made by our judgments of 20 February, 20 April and 20 July 2020 ([2020] NSWCA 21, 64 and 148).

2. Pursuant to the judgment of 20 July 2020 we made, inter alia, an order in the following terms:

“(2) Should Ms Li Wang seek to file any further application against the State of New South Wales or Mr Colin Hodgson in respect of any of the matters the subject of this Court’s decisions of 20 February 2020 and 20 April 2020 ([2020] NSWCA 21 and [2020] NSWCA 64) Ms Wang must at the same time file a document of no more than five pages showing cause why this Court should not in Chambers summarily dismiss the application as vexatious and an abuse of process.”

3. On 28 July 2020 Ms Wang, in accordance with a direction made by the Registrar, filed a four page written submission purporting to show cause why her motion of 28 July should not be dismissed as vexatious and an abuse of process pursuant to Order 2 made on 20 July 2020.

4. Ms Wang’s submission recites background matters and repeats assertions with which we have previously dealt. It does not raise any additional matter of substance.

5. In so concluding we note that Ms Wang’s notice of motion asserts that there was a breach of Part 60 Division 4 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) involved in a person temporarily acting in the position of associate to one of the members of the Court certifying one of our earlier judgments. That complaint is misconceived. Pt 60 of the Supreme Court Rules is concerned with the role and powers of Associate Judges, not people acting as an associate to a judge of the Court. There is no, even arguable, error in a person who is acting as an associate to a judge of the Court certifying a copy of the Court’s reasons for judgment; see generally s 157 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); Rule 36.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) and Attorney General (NSW) v Markisic [2014] NSWSC 1596 at [81]-[87].

6. As with her motion which we dealt with in our judgment of 20 July, Ms Wang’s current motion constitutes an impermissible attempt by her to re-agitate matters previously determined.

7. She has not therefore shown cause why her motion should not be summarily dismissed as vexatious and an abuse of process. That course should thus be taken.

8. Accordingly, we order that Ms Wang’s notice of motion filed on 28 July 2020 be dismissed with costs.

**********