Ogbonna v Government of Western Australia

1. The Applicant is restrained until further order from communicating with the First Respondent, or its legal representatives, in relation to this proceeding, other than in writing, and by an email sent to: (a) sso@sso.wa.gov.au; and/or (b) s.olynyk@sso.wa.gov.au.
2. Any document required to be served on the First Respondent will be taken to have been served on the First Respondent upon it being sent by email to one or both of the email addresses listed in Order 1 above.
3. Costs be reserved. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

O'BRYAN J: 1 By an application dated 22 August 2023, the applicant (Mr Ogbonna) applied for leave to appeal from the judgment of Colvin J delivered on 9 August 2023 in Ogbonna v Government of Western Australia (No 5) [2023] FCA 935. By that judgment, Justice Colvin summarily dismissed, pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), Mr Ogbonna's claim for defamation brought against the Government of Western Australia (Government) and a company called Programmed Integrated Workforce Ltd (Programmed). The claim had initially included another respondent, the Western Australian Police Force, but the Police Force was subsequently removed as a named respondent. 2 At the first case management hearing for the application for leave to appeal on 27 October 2023, the Government sought orders restraining the manner in which Mr Ogbonna communicated with the Government and its legal representatives. The orders sought by the Government were as follows: 1. The Applicant is restrained until further order from communicating with the First Respondent, or its legal representatives, in relation to this proceeding, other than in writing, and by an email sent to: (a) ; and/or (b) . 2. Any document required to be served on the First Respondent will be taken to have been served on the First Respondent upon it being sent by email to one or both of the email addresses listed in Order 1 above. 3 The Government's application for those orders was supported by an affidavit affirmed on 26 October 2023 by Stephen Olynyk, an Assistant State Solicitor with the State Solicitor's Office having the conduct of this matter on behalf of the Government. In the affidavit, Mr Olynyk included a sample of the records of telephone calls and emails initiated by Mr Ogbonna since 20 May 2022, including records of telephone calls made in October in the period leading up to the first case management hearing in this proceeding. The evidence shows that Mr Ogbonna has on numerous occasions telephoned and emailed lawyers and staff at the State Solicitor's Office in what can only be described as an insulting, abusive and harassing manner. The communications contain numerous allegations of criminal conduct by the respondents and their legal representatives, including allegations of corruption, perjury and attempting or conspiring to pervert the course of justice. A telephone call made to the Assistant State Counsel at the State Solicitor's Office at 7.40 am on 26 October 2023 was threatening. 4 At the first case management hearing, Mr Ogbonna indicated that he opposed the orders sought by the Government. I listed the Government's application for hearing today, and made orders for Mr Ogbonna to file and serve an outline of submissions and any affidavit in response to the Government's application by 4.00pm yesterday. 5 Mr Ogbonna did not file any submissions or affidavit in response to the Government's application and did not appear at the hearing of the application today. 6 The Court has power to control the manner in which litigants communicate with each other (and the Court) pursuant to ss 23 and 37P of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). On the basis of the evidence that has been filed, I am satisfied that the orders sought by the Government are appropriate in the interests of justice, and will promote the overarching purpose of civil practice and procedure to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law and as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible. The evidence shows that Mr Ogbonna's telephone and email communications with lawyers and staff at the State Solicitor's Office repetitively raise collateral allegations of criminal conduct and are insulting, abusive and harassing. Mr Ogbonna is entitled to pursue any legitimate grievances through appropriate channels. However, there is no legitimate reason for Mr Ogbonna to initiate repetitive telephone and email communications with lawyers and staff at the State Solicitor's Office. 7 An order that restrains Mr Ogbonna from communicating with the Government, or its legal representatives, in relation to this proceeding, other than in writing and by an email sent to the designated email addresses, will reduce the likelihood of Mr Ogbonna continuing to initiate unnecessary and inappropriate communications. At the same time, the order will not prevent Mr Ogbonna from communicating with the Government's lawyers as is necessary for the conduct of the proceeding. 8 For those reasons, I make the orders as sought by the Government. I certify that the preceding eight (8) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice O'Bryan.