HUTCHISON V. BIENVENU

HUTCHISON V. BIENVENU

The respondent has, within a fairly short period, instituted multiple vexatious proceedings without reasonable ground by repetitiously challenging already determined matters and naming multiple defendants without reasonable basis, thus satisfying the criteria for an order under O. 63 r. 6 of the High Court Rules.

Parties
Applicant: Hutchison; Respondent: Bienvenu, Constance May
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 1971
Procedural Posture
Application Under High Court Rules Order 63 Rule 6 / Judgment on Application
Outcome
Order made restricting further proceedings without leave
Legal Topics
Vexatious Proceedings, Restrictions on Initiating Legal Action
Civil Procedure Vexatious Proceedings Restrictions on Initiating Legal Action

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hutchison

Applicant

Bienvenu, Constance May

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under High Court Rules Order 63 Rule 6 / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has frequently and without reasonable ground instituted vexatious legal proceedings under O. 63 r. 6 of the High Court Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent has, within a fairly short period, instituted multiple vexatious proceedings without reasonable ground by repetitiously challenging already determined matters and naming multiple defendants without reasonable basis, thus satisfying the criteria for an order under O. 63 r. 6 of the High Court Rules.

Court Disposition

Order made restricting further proceedings without leave

Orders

  • The respondent, Constance May Bienvenu, shall not without the leave of the Court or a Justice begin any action, appeal (other than an appeal against this order), or other proceeding in the Court.