Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Ltd (No 5) [2024] FCA 1101

Ogbonna v CTI Logistics Ltd (No 5) [2024] FCA 1101

Leave is granted for the appellant to make an interlocutory application for extension of time to review the Registrar’s orders because it is reasonably arguable the appellant, who is self-represented and subject to a vexatious proceedings order, made a prior attempt within time. However, further leave to bring identical or repetitive applications is refused, as such conduct is an abuse of process and vexatious. Compliance with certain procedural rules is dispensed with, and the review is consolidated with the appeal hearing.

Parties
Appellant: Celestine Ogbonna; First Respondent: CTI Logistics Ltd (ACN 008 778 925); Second Respondent: Mark Vanderlist; Third Respondent: Tim Barton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application; Application for Leave to File Extension of Time for Review of Registrar's Orders
Outcome
Leave to apply for extension of time granted in part; refused in part.
Legal Topics
Leave to File Interlocutory Application, Vexatious Proceedings Order, Extension of Time, Review of Registrar's Decision, Appeal Procedure
Practice and Procedure Leave to File Interlocutory Application Vexatious Proceedings Order Extension of Time Review of Registrar's Decision Appeal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Celestine Ogbonna

Appellant

CTI Logistics Ltd (ACN 008 778 925)

First Respondent

Mark Vanderlist

Second Respondent

Tim Barton

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application; Application for Leave to File Extension of Time for Review of Registrar's Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to file an interlocutory application for extension of time to review Registrar's orders
  2. 2 Whether proposed interlocutory applications amount to abuse of process or are vexatious or frivolous
  3. 3 Whether the application for extension of time raises a reasonably arguable ground

Ratio Decidendi

Leave is granted for the appellant to make an interlocutory application for extension of time to review the Registrar’s orders because it is reasonably arguable the appellant, who is self-represented and subject to a vexatious proceedings order, made a prior attempt within time. However, further leave to bring identical or repetitive applications is refused, as such conduct is an abuse of process and vexatious. Compliance with certain procedural rules is dispensed with, and the review is consolidated with the appeal hearing.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for extension of time granted in part; refused in part.

Orders

  • The appellant has leave to make an interlocutory application for an extension of time to apply for review of the Registrar’s orders made on 19 June 2024, application deemed filed 12 September 2024, with compliance with r 17.01 dispensed with.
  • Application for extension of time to be determined without oral hearing, pursuant to s 20A.