Freeman v National Australia Bank [2012] FCA 659

Freeman v National Australia Bank [2012] FCA 659

Mr Freeman was already subject to orders requiring leave before commencing proceedings against the National Australia Bank or the trustees. The material relied on for leave repeated matters previously agitated and did not disclose anything warranting a grant of leave, in particular nothing supporting even an arguable case that any prior judgment was obtained by fraud. The application was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave by a Vexatious Litigant to Commence Proceedings Against Parties in Respect of Whom Leave Was Required / Directions Hearing; Application Heard and Determined Pursuant to R 5.08 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay each respondent's costs on an indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
['vexatious Litigant' 'leave to Commence Proceedings' 'finality of Judgments' 'fraud Exception to Finality' 'indemnity Costs']
['practice and Procedure' 'bankruptcy'] ['vexatious Litigant' 'leave to Commence Proceedings' 'finality of Judgments' 'fraud Exception to Finality' 'indemnity 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave by a Vexatious Litigant to Commence Proceedings Against Parties in Respect of Whom Leave Was Required / Directions Hearing; Application Heard and Determined Pursuant to R 5.08 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Freeman, who was subject to orders requiring leave before commencing proceedings against the Bank or the Trustees, should be granted leave to bring the proposed proceeding.' 'Whether the material relied on by Mr Freeman disclosed anything new or an arguable case that any prior judgment was obtained by fraud.' 'Whether the application should be dismissed with indemnity costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Freeman was already subject to orders requiring leave before commencing proceedings against the National Australia Bank or the trustees. The material relied on for leave repeated matters previously agitated and did not disclose anything warranting a grant of leave, in particular nothing supporting even an arguable case that any prior judgment was obtained by fraud. The application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay each respondent's costs on an indemnity basis.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' 'The applicant is to pay the costs of each respondent on an indemnity basis and, if not agreed, costs are to be taxed.']