Payne v Haski [2018] NSWCATAD 115

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Payne v Haski [2018] NSWCATAD 115 Hearing dates: On the Papers Date of orders: 30 May 2018 Decision date: 30 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: D A Cowdroy QC, ADCJ, Principal Member N S Isenberg, Senior Member B G Thomson, General Member Decision: 1. The Tribunal orders that the application be struck out pursuant to s 55 (1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for dismissal under section 55(1)(b) of NCAT Act - unable to identify any claim in respect of which the Tribunal has jurisdiction – proceedings dismissed. Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) Legal Profession Uniform Law 2004 Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 No 16 (NSW) Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW) Cases Cited: Nil Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Carl Payne (Applicant) Jacqueline Haski (First Respondent) Wendy Blacker (Second Respondent) Martin Williams (Third Respondent) Representation: Applicant in person Wendy Blacker Lawyers (Respondents) File Number(s): 2018/00052460

REASONS FOR DECISION

THE APPLICATION 1. By General Application Form filed on 14 February 2018, Mr Carl Payne (the applicant) filed orders seeking monetary compensation and disciplinary action against Ms Jacqueline Haski, Ms Wendy Blacker and Mr Martin Williams (the respondents). 2. From the information available, it appears that the applicant has been involved in litigation against a client of the respondents which has proceeded in the Federal Court of Australia. 3. The application states, in respect of the legislation purportedly conferring jurisdiction on the Tribunal : "This is an application under the: Legal Professions Act, Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules, Crimes Act 1900, Criminal Code 1899." 1. The orders sought are described as: "Monetary Compensation, Disiplinary [sic] Action." 1. The grounds for the application are stated to be as follows: "I believe that the aforementioned respondents have breached Federal Court Orders, they have knowingly and willingly tampered/altered/changed Federal Court Documents that have been stamped, signed and filed by the Court Registrar to gain an advantage and used their concerted attempts to persuade the judge That for a favorable decision, they have breached the Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules and other aforementioned Acts. The causation of this was denying myself the right to expected justice."