Zepinic v Attorney General NSW [2023] NSWSC 1396

Zepinic v Attorney General NSW [2023] NSWSC 1396

The current summons is an abuse of process as it seeks relief already refused in earlier litigation that has been exhaustively appealed and reviewed, with all avenues now exhausted. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain judicial review of the Associate Justice’s decision in this context; therefore, the proceedings must be dismissed and the plaintiff is to pay the defendants’ costs in gross sum amounts.

Parties
Plaintiff: Vito Zepinic; First Defendant: Attorney General of NSW; Second Defendant: Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (summons) and Related Motions / Application for Summary Dismissal – Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff’s summons dismissed as an abuse of process; plaintiff’s own notice of motion dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendants’ costs in assessed gross sums.
Legal Topics
Summary Dismissal, Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction of Supreme Court, Judicial Review, Appellate Procedure
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Summary Dismissal Abuse of Process Jurisdiction of Supreme Court Judicial Review Appellate 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 2 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vito Zepinic

Plaintiff

Attorney General of NSW

First Defendant

Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (summons) and Related Motions / Application for Summary Dismissal – Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff’s summons constitutes an abuse of process by re-agitating matters already finally determined
  2. 2 Whether the present proceedings are within time and competently brought
  3. 3 Jurisdiction of a single Divisional Judge to review a decision of an Associate Justice

Ratio Decidendi

The current summons is an abuse of process as it seeks relief already refused in earlier litigation that has been exhaustively appealed and reviewed, with all avenues now exhausted. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain judicial review of the Associate Justice’s decision in this context; therefore, the proceedings must be dismissed and the plaintiff is to pay the defendants’ costs in gross sum amounts.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff’s summons dismissed as an abuse of process; plaintiff’s own notice of motion dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendants’ costs in assessed gross sums.

Orders

  • The summons is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 8 September 2023 is dismissed.