Ramsey v Skyring

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant, Alan George Skyring, was declared a vexatious litigant in this Court by Sackville J on 6 July 1999: Ramsey v Skyring (1999) 164 ALR 378. Pursuant to s 37AQ(1) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ("the Act"), he cannot institute proceedings without obtaining leave under s 37AT(3). 2 On 16 October 2013, Mr Skyring attempted to file an originating application and supporting affidavit in the Queensland District Registry of this Court. The affidavit annexes three proposed originating applications and the application seeks leave to commence those proceedings. The Queensland District Registrar refused to accept Mr Skyring's documents for filing. 3 On 30 October 2013, Mr Skyring filed an originating application and supporting affidavit seeking an order that leave be granted to review the Registrar's decision. Presumably, Mr Skyring also seeks an order that his originating applications be accepted for filing. 4 Mr Skyring's affidavit annexes a large amount of material, is difficult to navigate and is largely incomprehensible. His affidavit is replete with documents that appear to be irrelevant to his application. As a result, the process of delineating precisely what proceedings Mr Skyring wishes to institute has been arduous. 5 It is convenient at this point to attempt to summarise the various proceedings which Mr Skyring seeks leave to institute.

The originating applications 6 It can be inferred from Mr Skyring's affidavit of 30 October 2013 that, in addition to his application to review the Registrar's decision, he seeks leave to commence the three proceedings referred to in his affidavit of 16 October 2013. 7 The first is characterised as a notice of appeal purporting to appeal from the judgment of Collier J delivered on 2 October 2013: Skyring, in the matter of Skyring [2013] FCA 997. 8 The second proceeding is cast as a "re-presentation in updated form" of an originating application presented in this Court on 21 August 2013. That application seeks an order rescinding the order made by Sackville J declaring Mr Skyring to be a vexatious litigant and compensation "in appropriate quantum, manner and form" for "general distress". 9 The final application is a further "re-presentation in updated form" of an application presented in this Court on 2 December 1991, purporting to seek an order annulling Mr Skyring's bankruptcy. 10 The decision of the District Registrar to refuse to accept Mr Skyring's applications for filing was made pursuant to r 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). That rule provides that a Registrar may refuse to accept a document if satisfied that the document is an abuse of the process of the Court or is frivolous or vexatious. 11 The District Registrar decided not to accept the document purporting to be a notice of appeal from the judgment of Collier J on the basis that the judgment was interlocutory and leave to appeal had not been obtained as required under s 24(1A) of the Act. The District Registrar considered that the other two applications sought to relitigate claims that had already been heard and determined by the Court. The District Registrar decided that each of the proposed applications was vexatious and an abuse of the process of the Court.