Clark v State of New South Wales [2021] NSWSC 380

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Clark v State of New South Wales [2021] NSWSC 380 Hearing dates: 4, 30 March 2021 Date of orders: 16 April 2021 Decision date: 16 April 2021 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Wright J Decision: The Court orders and directs that: (1) Subparagraphs (b) and (c) of the particulars to paragraph 27 of the plaintiff's further amended statement of claim filed on 24 July 2020 are to be struck out by being ruled through on the Court file copy with the notation "Struck out by order of Wright J on 16 April 2021". (2) The defendant's notice of motion filed on 14 September 2020 is otherwise dismissed. (3) The costs of the motion filed on 14 September 2020 are to be the plaintiff's costs in the cause. (4) The defendant is to file and serve its defence on or before 30 April 2021. (5) The plaintiff is to serve on the defendant the evidence upon which he intends to rely, including signed evidentiary statements from all witnesses and copies of all documents, on or before 12 July 2021, or such other time as the Registrar may direct. (6) The defendant is to serve on the plaintiff the evidence upon which it intends to rely, including signed evidentiary statements from all witnesses and copies of all documents, on or before 4 October 2021, or such other time as the Registrar may direct. (7) The plaintiff is to serve on the defendant any evidence in reply, on or before 1 November 2021, or such other time as the Registrar may direct. (8) The matter is listed for directions before the Registrar on 5 November 2021. (9) The parties have liberty to apply to the Registrar to have the matter relisted on 3 days' notice. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application for summary dismissal pursuant to UCPR rr 12.7 and 13.4 – Where proceedings commenced in 2002 in respect of conduct by police officers in 1997 and 2000 – Where prior judgments of the Court of Appeal, Hidden J and Beech-Jones J permitted the plaintiff to plead a cause of action of abuse of process in respect of conduct in 2000 – Where plaintiff largely complied with Registrar's direction as to filing a further amended statement of claim giving effect to the decision of Beech-Jones J in Clark v State of New South Wales [2018] NSWSC 83 – Where defendant did not submit that the statement of claim, in so far as it was within the scope of the leave granted by Beech-Jones J, failed to disclose a cause of action or was frivolous – Proceedings not vexatious or an abuse of process in the circumstances – Matter should be prepared for hearing as soon as possible – Notice of motion dismissed except for minor matter required to ensure the pleading complied with the previous decision by the Court of Appeal. Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Birkett v James [1978] AC 297 Clark v Robards [2010] NSWSC 522 Clark v Robards [2015] NSWCA 140 Clark v Robards [2016] NSWCA 187 Clark v Robards (No 3) [2016] NSWCA 354 Clark v State of New South Wales (2006) 66 NSWLR 640; [2006] NSWSC 673 Clark v State of New South Wales (No. 2) [2006] NSWSC 914 Clark v State of New South Wales; Clark v Robards & Ors [2014] NSWSC 742 Clark v State of NSW [2017] NSWSC 1414 Clark v State of New South Wales [2018] NSWCA 13 Clark v State of New South Wales [2018] NSWCA 120 Dey v Victorian Railways Commissioners (1949) 78 CLR 62 General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner of Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125; [1964] HCA 69 Green v Healthscope Ltd (t/as Hills Private Hospital) [2015] NSWCA 325 Hobbs v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2013] NSWCA 432 Perera v Genworth Financial Mortgage Insurance Pty Ltd (2017) 94 NSWLR 83; [2017] NSWCA 19 Regie Nationale des Usines Renault SA & Anor v Zhang (2002) 210 CLR 491; [2002] HCA 10 Spencer v Commonwealth of Australia (2010) 241 CLR 118; [2010] HCA 28 State of New South Wales v Plaintiff A [2012] NSWCA 248 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378; [1993] HCA 77 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Peter Frederick Clark (Plaintiff) State of New South Wales (Defendant) Representation: Self-represented (Plaintiff)