Jay v Petrikas [2022] NSWSC 1497

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Jay v Petrikas [2022] NSWSC 1497 Hearing dates: 28 October 2022 Date of orders: 3 November 2022 Decision date: 03 November 2022 Jurisdiction: Equity - Duty List Before: Robb J Decision: The orders of the Court are: (1) The plaintiffs' claims in prayers 1(a)(i), 1(b)(i), 1(c)(i), 1(d)(i), 1(e)(i), 1(f)(i), 1(g)(i), 1(h)(i), 1(i)(i), 1(j)(i), 1(k)(i), and 1(l)(i) are dismissed pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 13.4. (2) The plaintiffs' statement of claim is otherwise struck out pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 14.28. (3) The plaintiffs' notice of motion filed on 12 October 2022 is dismissed. (4) The plaintiffs are ordered to pay the costs of the defendants of the plaintiffs' notice of motion filed on 12 October 2022 and the defendants' notice of motion filed on 28 October 2022. See also [98] below Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE — summary disposal — dismissal of proceedings — frivolous or vexatious proceedings — plaintiffs bring proceedings in District Court against four defendants for injurious falsehood and proceedings listed for hearing — plaintiffs subsequently bring proceedings in Supreme Court seeking declarations against same defendants and State of New South Wales — certain of declarations sought are as to the falsity of allegations concerning plaintiffs allegedly made by first to third defendants — whether Court has power to make declarations merely as to the falsity in fact of allegations — Court has no such power — pleadings — striking out — tendency to cause prejudice, embarrassment or delay — pleadings comprise bare allegations of ultimate facts without pleading underlying facts necessary to permit findings of ultimate facts Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 140 Crown Proceedings Act 1988 (NSW), s 5 Rural Fires Act 1997 (NSW), s 8 Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 75 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (NSW), rr 13.4, 14.28, 15.4, 15.10 Cases Cited: Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564; [1992] HCA 10 Boensch v Pascoe (2019) 268 CLR 593; [2019] HCA 49 Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Ltd (1972) 127 CLR 421; [1972] HCA 61 Massoud v Nationwide News Pty Ltd; Massoud v Fox Sports Australia Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCA 150 Palmer Bruyn & Parker Pty Ltd v Parsons (2001) 208 CLR 388; [2001] HCA 69 Salmar Holdings Pty Ltd v Hornsby Shire Council [1971] 1 NSWLR 192\ Sullivan v Moody (2001) 207 CLR 562; [2001] HCA 59 Tame v New South Wales (2002) 211 CLR 317; [2002] HCA 35 Texts Cited: J D Heydon, M J Leeming and P G Turner, Meagher, Gummow & Lehane's Equity Doctrines & Remedies (5th ed, 2015, LexisNexis Butterworths) Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Graeme Jay (First Plaintiff) John Peters (Second Plaintiff) Chris Petrikas (First Defendant) David Ryan (Second Defendant) Ian Wedge (Third Defendant) Karen Hodges (Fourth Defendant) State of New South Wales (Fifth Defendant) Representation: Counsel: J Sexton SC & T Crispin (Plaintiffs) M Richardson SC & T Senior (Defendants)