Fuller v Registrar, Federal Court of Australia [2016] FCA 650

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Fuller v Registrar, Federal Court of Australia [2016] FCA 650 File number(s): WAD 402 of 2015

Judge(s): SIOPIS J

Date of judgment: 3 June 2016

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – review of Registrar's decision to refuse to permit a person subject to a vexatious litigant order to file an application – whether that person was entitled to file the application by reason of a previous order made by the Court.

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37AO(2), 37AR, 37AR(3), 37AR(3)(b), 37AR(3)(c), 37AT

Cases cited: Fuller v Toms [2013] FCA 1422 Fuller v Toms [2015] FCAFC 91

Date of hearing: 15 October 2015

Date of last application and submissions: 31 May 2016

Registry: Western Australia

Division: General Division

National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations

Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection

Category: Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 43

Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant appeared in person.

Counsel for the Respondent: The Respondent did not appear.

ORDERS WAD 402 of 2015

BETWEEN: DONALD FULLER Applicant

AND: REGISTRAR, FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Respondent

JUDGE: SIOPIS J DATE OF ORDER: 3 JUNE 2016

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The decision of the Deputy District Registrar to refuse to accept for filing the applicant's application in WAD 1 of 2014 dated 16 July 2015, and supporting documents (the 16 July application), is set aside. 2. The applicant's application dated 31 May 2016, to re-open his case is dismissed. 3. The Registry is directed to accept the applicant's 16 July application for filing. 4. By 4:00 pm on 22 June 2016, the applicant is to file and serve on the respondents to WAD 332 of 2012 (the respondents) an affidavit which addresses the matters referred to in s 37AR(3)(a), (b) and (c) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and takes into account the observations made in [38] to [39] of the reasons for decision (the s 37AR(3) affidavit). 5. Service of the 16 July application on the respondents is otherwise dispensed with. 6. The submissions filed by the applicant and the respondents in this application are taken to have been filed in respect of the determination of the 16 July application in WAD 1 of 2014. 7. The respondents have leave to rely upon the affidavit of Mr Justin Anthony McDonnell dated 13 May 2014, in respect of the determination of the 16 July application in WAD 1 of 2014. 8. By 4:00 pm on 1 July 2016, the respondents are to file and serve any affidavits in response to the applicant's s 37AR(3) affidavit. 9. By 4:00 pm on 8 July 2016, the applicant is to file and serve any supplementary submissions in support of his 16 July application upon the respondents, such submissions are not to exceed five pages. 10. By 4:00 pm on 15 July 2016, the respondents are to file and serve any supplementary submissions in opposition to the applicant's 16 July application, such submissions are not to exceed five pages. 11. Unless the Court, on the application of either the applicant or the respondents, otherwise orders, the 16 July application is to be determined on the papers. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.