SAD 403 of 2015
5 The originating application for judicial review is in accordance with Form 66 (r 31.01) which is the appropriate form for applications under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) ("ADJR Act"). In his application, Mr Barkla seeks to challenge a decision of the District Registrar under r 2.26 to refuse to accept an originating application and affidavit Mr Barkla sought to file in the Court on or about 2 November 2015. I will refer to these documents as "the rejected documents". Under r 2.26, a Registrar may refuse to accept a document if the Registrar is satisfied that the document is an abuse of the process of the Court or is frivolous or vexatious on the face of the document or by reference to any documents already filed or submitted for filing with the document.
6 The rejected documents involve a claim by Mr Barkla against the Acting Registrar of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Mr Barkla claims to bring his proceeding in a representative capacity. The basis of Mr Barkla's claim appears to be the refusal of the Acting Court of Appeal Registrar to accept two documents Mr Barkla sought to file, being a document entitled "Referral of a legal issue" and a document entitled a "Notice to Admit Facts". Mr Barkla alleges that in refusing to accept the documents, the Acting Court of Appeal Registrar contravened various sections of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth).
7 The District Registrar refused to accept the rejected documents and, on 4 November 2015, she wrote to Mr Barkla in the following terms:
I refer to the originating application and affidavit you sent to the Registry on 2 November 2015.
Among other things, your application claims that the respondent is in breach of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (false or misleading documents, general dishonest and abuse of public office). The Court does not have jurisdiction to hear matters relating to the Criminal Code Act 1995 as outlined in your application, nor the other pieces of legislation you have included. The Court cannot make the findings that you seek.
Accordingly, I am unable to accept your documents for filing pursuant to Rule 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
The usual course of action for parties who wish to appeal the decision of a registrar of a court is to seek to have the decision reviewed by a judge of that court. I am unfamiliar with the procedure in the Supreme Court of Western Australia, but you may wish to enquire further as to a suitable course of action.
I return your documents to you.
8 Mr Barkla claims that in refusing to accept the rejected documents, the District Registrar acted fraudulently, dishonestly and in abuse of public office.
9 The decision of a Registrar under r 2.26 not to accept a document is not reviewable under s 35A(1) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). It may be reviewed under the ADJR Act (Satchithanantham v National Australia Bank Limited [2010] FCAFC 47), but before relief is granted, one of the grounds in s 5 would need to be established. I will also assume, for the purposes of these applications only, that relief for jurisdictional error may be granted under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth).
10 This Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the application Mr Barkla seeks to bring against the Acting Court of Appeal Registrar, and the District Registrar was correct in deciding to refuse to accept the rejected documents.