Viavattene v Attorney General of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 218

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Viavattene v Attorney General of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 218 Hearing dates: 3 July 2014 Decision date: 03 July 2014 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Tobias AJA at [12] Decision: (1) To the extent that s 14 is engaged by the present application, waive the requirement in s 14(3) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act that the applicant file an affidavit complying with that provision. (2) Extend time to seek leave to appeal to the date of filing and serving the summons by which leave was sought. (3) Grant the applicant leave, pursuant to s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act, to commence proceedings seeking leave and, if leave is granted, an appeal from the judgment and orders in the Common Law Division of 26 March 2014. (4) Pursuant to s 101(2) of the Supreme Court Act, grant the applicant leave to appeal against the judgment in the Common Law Division. (5) Pending the hearing and determination of the appeal, and pursuant to s 9 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act, order that the orders made by Bellew J on 26 March 2014 be varied so as not to apply to any appeal or application for leave to appeal from any conviction, sentence or order leading to imprisonment or to any application for bail. (6) Order that the costs of the application be costs in the appeal. (7) Grant leave to each party to seek further directions from the Registrar as to the conduct of the appeal. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: APPEAL - extension of time - whether arguable case of error - effect of orders under appeal - orders made in absence of applicant - whether arguable case of procedural unfairness - whether orders arguably too broad - grant of leave