Clark v State of New South Wales [2016] NSWSC 808

Clark v State of New South Wales [2016] NSWSC 808

Leave to bring proceedings was refused for claims proposed in MFI 4 and MFI 6 as they involved abuse of process, lacked a prima facie basis, were hopeless or unarguable, or overlapped with concurrent proceedings. Leave was granted for claims proposed in MFI 5 except the 2007 assault with the fire hose, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process claims. Mr Clark could file an amended statement of claim for allowed claims in accordance with Uniform Civil Procedure Rules.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Commence Civil Proceedings Under the Felons (civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (nsw) / Final Orders on Leave Application
Outcome
Leave to bring proceedings proposed in MFI 4 and MFI 6 is refused. Leave to bring proceedings proposed in MFI 5 is granted, except for claims relating to the alleged 2007 assault with the fire hose, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process.
Legal Topics
['leave to Commence Proceedings' 'felons (civil Proceedings) Act' 'negligence' 'malicious Prosecution' 'abuse of Process' 'false Imprisonment' 'false Arrest']
['civil Procedure' 'torts'] ['leave to Commence Proceedings' 'felons (civil Proceedings) Act' 'negligence' 'malicious Prosecution' 'abuse of Process' 'false Imprisonment' 'false Arrest']

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 to Commence Civil Proceedings Under the Felons (civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (nsw) / Final Orders on Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to Mr Clark to commence civil proceedings under the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)' 'Whether the proposed claims are not an abuse of process and there is a prima facie ground for proceedings' 'Whether the pleadings comply with Uniform Civil Procedure Rules']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to bring proceedings was refused for claims proposed in MFI 4 and MFI 6 as they involved abuse of process, lacked a prima facie basis, were hopeless or unarguable, or overlapped with concurrent proceedings. Leave was granted for claims proposed in MFI 5 except the 2007 assault with the fire hose, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process claims. Mr Clark could file an amended statement of claim for allowed claims in accordance with Uniform Civil Procedure Rules.

Court Disposition

Leave to bring proceedings proposed in MFI 4 and MFI 6 is refused. Leave to bring proceedings proposed in MFI 5 is granted, except for claims relating to the alleged 2007 assault with the fire hose, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process.

Orders

  • ['Leave to bring the proceedings proposed in MFI 4 and MFI 6 is refused.' 'Leave to bring the proceedings proposed in MFI 5 is granted, other than in relation to the alleged 2007 assault with the fire hose, malicious prosecution and abuse of process claims.' 'Mr Clark has leave to file an amended statement of claim...