Jorgensen v Jorgensen (No 3) [2021] FCA 201

Jorgensen v Jorgensen (No 3) [2021] FCA 201

Based on his pattern of instituting or causing others to institute proceedings aimed at subverting an earlier security for costs order and re-litigating issues determined or that could have been determined, the first respondent had frequently instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings concerning the Rainbow Motor Inn Unit Trust. Entities controlled by him or acting as his proxies (including the third, fourth, and sixth respondents) had similarly participated in such proceedings or conducted them in concert with him. This satisfied the criteria for making vexatious proceedings orders under s 37AO. Orders were also appropriate under s 23 and s 37AO(2)(c) to prevent further abuse of...

Parties
Applicant: Brian Laurence Jorgensen; First Respondent: Alan Bradley Jorgensen; Third Respondent: Farmers Fruit Box & Plastics Pty Ltd ACN 004 359 979 (formerly Teksid Pty Ltd); Fourth Respondent: Mijac Investments Pty Ltd ACN 089 820 280; Fifth Respondent: PPB Co Pty Ltd ACN 616 069 473; Sixth Respondent: Tieu My Nguyen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Vexatious Proceedings Order / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Vexatious proceedings orders made; costs orders in part; other costs applications reserved
Legal Topics
Vexatious Proceedings, Restraints on Litigants, Trusts, Costs
Practice and Procedure Vexatious Proceedings Restraints on Litigants Trusts Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Laurence Jorgensen

Applicant

Alan Bradley Jorgensen

First Respondent

Farmers Fruit Box & Plastics Pty Ltd ACN 004 359 979 (formerly Teksid Pty Ltd)

Third Respondent

Mijac Investments Pty Ltd ACN 089 820 280

Fourth Respondent

PPB Co Pty Ltd ACN 616 069 473

Fifth Respondent

Tieu My Nguyen

Sixth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Vexatious Proceedings Order / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first respondent and associated entities should be subject to vexatious proceedings orders under s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether other respondents, as proxies or entities controlled by the first respondent, should also be subject to orders under s 37AO
  3. 3 Whether ancillary orders under s 23 and s 37AO(2)(c) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) should be made to prevent abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

Based on his pattern of instituting or causing others to institute proceedings aimed at subverting an earlier security for costs order and re-litigating issues determined or that could have been determined, the first respondent had frequently instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings concerning the Rainbow Motor Inn Unit Trust. Entities controlled by him or acting as his proxies (including the third, fourth, and sixth respondents) had similarly participated in such proceedings or conducted them in concert with him. This satisfied the criteria for making vexatious proceedings orders under s 37AO. Orders were also appropriate under s 23 and s 37AO(2)(c) to prevent further abuse of...

Court Disposition

Vexatious proceedings orders made; costs orders in part; other costs applications reserved

Orders

  • The first respondent is prohibited, pursuant to s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), from instituting or causing to be instituted, directly or indirectly, any proceedings in the Court regarding, connected with, or arising out of the Rainbow Motor Inn Unit Trust, including via entities controlled...
  • Ancillary order prohibiting the first respondent from exercising powers of appointment under the Jorgensen Family Trust to change trustees for the purpose of further litigation relating to the Rainbow Motor Inn Unit Trust.