Bar-Mordecai v Health Care Complaints Commission [2024] NSWSC 1364

Bar-Mordecai v Health Care Complaints Commission [2024] NSWSC 1364

The application was dismissed because the applicant's affidavit failed to substantially comply with s 14(3) by omitting at least two recent applications for leave. Alternatively, the proceedings were found to be vexatious as they sought to relitigate previously determined matters.

Parties
Plaintiff: Michael Bar-Mordecai; First Interested Person: Attorney General in and for the State of NSW; First Defendant: Health Care Complaints Commission; Second Defendant: Medical Council of NSW; Third Defendant: David Swain; Fourth Defendant: Frances Zaharias; Fifth Defendant: Nicole Lawless
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Institute Proceedings / Application Under Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw) S 14
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigants, Leave to Institute Proceedings, Affidavit Requirements Under Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw)
Civil Procedure Vexatious Litigants Leave to Institute Proceedings Affidavit Requirements Under Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw)

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Bar-Mordecai

Plaintiff

Attorney General in and for the State of NSW

First Interested Person

Health Care Complaints Commission

First Defendant

Medical Council of NSW

Second Defendant

David Swain

Third Defendant

Frances Zaharias

Fourth Defendant

Nicole Lawless

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Institute Proceedings / Application Under Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (nsw) S 14

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant’s affidavit substantially complied with s 14(3) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the application was vexatious in nature

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicant's affidavit failed to substantially comply with s 14(3) by omitting at least two recent applications for leave. Alternatively, the proceedings were found to be vexatious as they sought to relitigate previously determined matters.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed under s 15(1)(a) of Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) for failure to comply with s 14(3) affidavit requirements
  • Application dismissed under s 15(1)(b) as proceedings are vexatious