Macatangay v State of New South Wales

Judgment

1. The applicant in these proceedings is the subject of an order made by Macfarlan JA, Sackville and Tobias AJA on 15 November 2012 pursuant to the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) s 8(7). Extracted from Macatangay v State of New South Wales [2012] NSWCA 374, those orders were: 1. all proceedings in New South Wales already instituted by the applicant in matters Nos 20144 of 2005 and 269316 of 2005 be stayed; and 2. the applicant be prohibited from instituting any further proceedings in New South Wales relating to any of the claims or complaints made by her in the Matters.
2. The applicant filed an application on 4 April 2017 pursuant to s 14(2) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) for leave to institute proceedings that would otherwise be prohibited by the above order.
3. In her application, the applicant states that she 'is applying to this Court that she be allowed to maintain proceedings Matter No 2005/269316 and 2007/265877'. Her summons filed on 4 April 2017 seeks relief in the following terms: 1 Set aside all the judgements made that has relied on the information that there is settlement and deed of release as they are decisions that are manifestly wrong. 2 Pay the applicant the damages caused by the Respondent's wrongful act of depriving her of the basic right to earn a living as a High School Mathematics teacher or in any capacity by putting on the Confidential Register of people prohibited to be employed in any capacity. 3 All other relief the Honourable Court deemed appropriate. 4 Cost.
4. In a document titled 'Application for leave to maintain proceedings matter 2005/269316 and 2007/265877', the applicant raises five grounds upon which she asserts leave should be granted: 1) She was working very well as a permanent Mobile High School Mathematics Teacher at Bossley Park High School, but when she was transferred at Merrylands High School to relieve a Mathematics teacher, she was unreasonably put on an Efficiency Program straight on the first day 31 January 2000 and continued for three consecutive years culminating on annulling her appointment and putting on the Confidential Register of people prohibited to be employed in any capacity resulting in preclusion from employment and causing very serious and great damage to her. 2) When she filed a proceeding at the NSW Supreme Court in relation to this unlawful prohibition, the NSW Department of Education filed a proceeding in the form of Notice of Motion seeking dismissal of her proceeding on the ground of the false information that there is a settlement and 8 April 2003 deed of release of the IRC Threatened Dismissal Application filed on 4 September 2003. 3) All the submissions and evidence put by Miguela Macatangay at the NSW Supreme Court and Court of Appeal was ignored and never given any consideration and the prohibition claim was never tried, never litigated as the court considered only what the NSW Department of Education has told the Court that there is settlement and deed of release. 4) In all the proceedings instituted by Miguela Macatangay that are unsuccessful, the order is made in reliance on the information that there is settlement and deed of release. 5) In the decision of the Federal Court of Australia,+++ Justice Katzmann who read the submissions and evidence provided to the Court by Miguela Macatangay, Her Honour found out that there was no deed of release and hence no settlement of the IRC Threatened Dismissal Application.