Attorney General v Chan [2011] NSWSC 1315

Attorney General v Chan [2011] NSWSC 1315

The Court was satisfied that the Defendant had been given an opportunity to be heard and that the summons and service objections were without substance. The judgments and tribunal decisions relied on showed that, over many matters from 2004 onward, the Defendant instituted and conducted proceedings and interlocutory applications without reasonable grounds, re-litigated determined issues, made baseless and serious allegations against individuals, lawyers and judicial officers, failed to comply with directions, and caused harassment, annoyance, delay and detriment. Those proceedings were vexatious within s 6 and were frequent within s 8. Given the protective purpose of the jurisdiction, the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 8 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw) for Vexatious Proceedings Orders / Principal Judgment on Summons Filed 25 March 2011
Outcome
Vexatious proceedings orders made against the Defendant; Defendant ordered to pay the Plaintiff's costs.
Legal Topics
['vexatious Proceedings Orders' 'meaning of Vexatious Proceedings' 'meaning of Frequently' 'stay of Existing Proceedings' 'prohibition on Instituting Proceedings Without Leave' 'procedural Fairness']
['procedure' 'civil Litigation'] ['vexatious Proceedings Orders' 'meaning of Vexatious Proceedings' 'meaning of Frequently' 'stay of Existing Proceedings' 'prohibition on Instituting Proceedings Without Leave' 'procedural Fairness']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 8 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw) for Vexatious Proceedings Orders / Principal Judgment on Summons Filed 25 March 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Defendant had been validly served and whether the hearing should proceed in his absence.' 'Whether proceedings conducted before the commencement of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) could be taken into account.' 'Whether the proceedings relied on by the Plaintiff were vexatious proceedings within s 6 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW).' 'Whether the Defendant had frequently instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings in Australia within s 8 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW).' 'Whether the Court should prohibit the Defendant from instituting proceedings in New South Wales without leave and stay proceedings already instituted by him in New South Wales.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the Defendant had been given an opportunity to be heard and that the summons and service objections were without substance. The judgments and tribunal decisions relied on showed that, over many matters from 2004 onward, the Defendant instituted and conducted proceedings and interlocutory applications without reasonable grounds, re-litigated determined issues, made baseless and serious allegations against individuals, lawyers and judicial officers, failed to comply with directions, and caused harassment, annoyance, delay and detriment. Those proceedings were vexatious within s 6 and were frequent within s 8. Given the protective purpose of the jurisdiction, the...

Court Disposition

Vexatious proceedings orders made against the Defendant; Defendant ordered to pay the Plaintiff's costs.

Orders

  • ['That, pursuant to s 8(7)(b) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008, the Defendant is prohibited from instituting proceedings in New South Wales without leave of the Court.' 'That, pursuant to s 8(7)(a) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008, all of the proceedings in New South Wales already instituted by the...