Application of Pamela Budd [2020] NSWSC 452

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Application of Pamela Budd [2020] NSWSC 452 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 28 April 2020 Decision date: 28 April 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Fagan J Decision: 1. The plaintiff's application pursuant to s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 for leave to re-commence proceedings No 256622/2006 is refused. 2. The summons is dismissed. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – parties – vexatious litigant – leave to re-commence proceedings refused Legislation Cited: Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) Cases Cited: Attorney General v Budd [2013] NSWSC 155 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Pamela Joan Budd Registrar-General Representation: Counsel: N/A

Solicitors: Lincoln Legal (plaintiff) N/A File Number(s): 2020/67963 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. On 19 April 2013, for reasons given in Attorney General v Budd [2013] NSWSC 155, Hall J made the following order: (1) Pursuant to s 8(7)(b) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008, Pamela Joan Theresa Budd is prohibited from instituting proceedings in New South Wales other than with leave of an appropriate court under that Act. Ms Budd now applies pursuant to s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW) for leave to "resume" proceeding No 265622 of 2006 in the Common Law Division of this Court.

Budd v Registrar-General (No 265622 of 2006) 1. Ms Budd commenced her 2006 proceeding on 27 October 2006 by filing a summons naming the Director General of Lands Titles as defendant. The summons was a pro forma printed document with the required particulars completed in barely legible handwriting. The "Relief claimed" section was filled out in these terms: I claim relief from Director of Lands Titles Office $500,000 for compensation for present market value of the loss of my legally owned Wyong Land estate Real whole [?] Land Delia Avenue. I claim the [?] Distress and the loss and pain from fraudulent transfer of land. 1. Despite its irregular form the summons was accepted for filing and was marked with a listing date of 30 January 2007. At the same time Ms Budd filed a notice of motion, which was given the same return date. This was also a printed pro forma document with handwritten entries. The "Orders sought" section was completed as follows: 1. Pay me for present market value of Wyong my Land estate. 2. Pay me compensation for the painful and suffering from the fraud transfers loss of my Real Property estate Wyong land in Breach of the Land's Titles and Crimes Act against me. Order No (2) seek $1.2 million and the wrong Fraud Transfers. Remove all fraud from Register. Amy for the Breach of Lands Titles Act 1. Ms Budd did not personally serve the summons but sent it by facsimile to the Department of Lands on 23 November 2006. A notice of appearance was filed on 6 December 2006. On 30 January 2007 Deputy Registrar Haggett conducted a directions hearing with Ms Budd attending by telephone, at her request. She had informed the registry that she suffered from agoraphobia and was unable to attend in person. On the Court file of the 2006 proceeding there a number of psychologists' reports, apparently supplied by Ms Budd during the brief history of the matter, attesting to her agoraphobia and anxiety. The psychologists who wrote these reports and the dates of them are: Christopher V Alexander, 12 October 2002; Avshalom Otmy, 5 April 2004; Yvette Hall, 3 March 2005; Liliane R Goodman, 28 April 2005 and 1 March 2006. 2. On 30 January 2007 Deputy Registrar Haggett made these orders: 1 The plaintiff is to file and serve a statement of claim on or before the 27 February 2007. 2 The plaintiff is to seek an order in the statement of claim that leave be granted pursuant to Section 131 of the Real Property Act. 3 The statement of claim is to show the defendant as "The Registrar-General of New South Wales". 4 The matter is listed in the Registrar's Application List on the 28 February 2007. 1. In late 2006 and early 2007 ss 131 and 132 of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) provided as follows (extracted so far as presently relevant): 131 Administrative proceedings for recovery of compensation (1) A person who has suffered compensable loss may lodge a claim for compensation, in the approved form, with the Registrar-General. (2) Such a claim may not be made more than 6 years after: (a) the date on which the act or omission giving rise to the compensable loss occurred, or (b) if the compensable loss arose after the date on which that act or omission occurred, the date on which the compensable loss arose. (3) The regulations may make provision for or with respect to the manner in which a claim is to be made and dealt with. (4) The Registrar-General may determine a claim by making an offer of settlement or by refusing the claim. (5) Section 135 [governing the settlement of claims by the Registrar-General] applies to the settlement, and any offer of settlement, of a claim. (6) A claimant must co-operate fully with the Registrar-General for the purpose of ensuring that the Registrar-General has sufficient information to be able: (a) to assess the validity of the claim, and (b) to assess the claimant's compensable loss, and (c) to make an informed offer of compensation. (7) In particular, a claimant must comply with any reasonable request by the Registrar-General: (a) to furnish specified information or to produce specified documents, or (b) to take specified action to further the claim. (8) In assessing the reasonableness of a request by the Registrar-General, regard is to be had to the following criteria: [criteria (a)-(h) are set out in the subsection but omitted from this extract) (9) For the purposes of section 132, a claim is taken to have been refused if it is not determined: (a) within 12 months after the claim was made, or (b) if at the end of that period the claimant has failed to provide information in fulfilment of the duty imposed by subsection (6), within 2 months after that information is provided. (10) Subsection (9) does not prevent a claim from being determined under this section in favour of the claimant after the expiry of the relevant period limited by that subsection, if the claimant has not commenced proceedings under section 132. (11) [omitted from extract] 132 Court proceedings for the recovery of compensation (1) Proceedings before a court for the payment of compensation are to be taken against the Registrar-General as nominal defendant. (2) Court proceedings may not be commenced: (a) unless administrative proceedings have been commenced and determined in relation to the compensable loss, or (b) more than 12 months after the date on which administrative proceedings have been determined in relation to the compensable loss, except by leave of the court or with the consent of the Registrar-General. (3) Court proceedings may be commenced at any time during the period of 12 months referred to in subsection (2) (b) despite any provision of the Limitation Act 1969 to the contrary. (4) In any court proceedings, the Registrar-General is not bound by any prejudicial act or omission by any party to the proceedings, such as: (a) entering into, or offering to enter into, a compromise, or (b) granting, or offering to grant, a release or waiver. (5) If court proceedings are commenced following administrative proceedings that have been determined by the offer of compensation and the compensation awarded by the court is less than the compensation offered by the determination: (a) the claimant's costs in the court proceedings are not payable by the Registrar-General, and (b) the Registrar-General's costs are payable by the claimant, unless the court orders otherwise. 1. In order 2 made by the Deputy Registrar on 30 January 2007, the reference to leave being granted pursuant to s 131 was clearly intended – and would have been understood – as a reference to leave under s 132(2). A copy of the orders was sent out to Ms Budd at the address she had provided for service, namely, 38/242 Malabar Road, South Coogee. 2. At some time during February 2007 Ms Budd prepared a statement of claim on a printed pro forma document. This named the Registrar-General as defendant, in accordance with Deputy Registrar Haggett's order 3 of 30 January 2007. The statement of claim did not seek leave to proceed, as required by s 132(2) in circumstances where Ms Budd had not taken any administrative proceeding for compensation under s 131. With respect to both "Relief claimed" and "Pleadings and particulars", the statement of claim simply stated, "See attached letter 30/1/07". Two such letters were attached. One of them contained the following matter: STATEMENT OF CLAIMS DETAILS/RELIEF/ORDERS (1) I am claiming against the Registrar State of New South Wales, the Land Director contravened the "Lands Titles Act", causing breach of his proper standard duty of care. This caused highly negligent breach of "Lands Act" against me and thus causing me to suffer the loss of my own legally owned real property, a whole block of land 167 Delia Avenue Wyong. NOTE: For this property loss my estate I claim relief compensation for the "actual present market value" of this property situated at 167 Delia Avenue Wyong. […] my name on this property is my married name (Pamela Jemison) and my mother Marie Budd gave it to me in this name 11 June 1977. […] at the time this land Delia Avenue was transferred on 11 June 1977, I was "out of the country" living in Honolulu, Hawaii with my husband Ray Jemison […] I had no knowledge my name was on this land and I was 20 years old or so. […] I claim phobias caused from the Lands Office passing over the counter my whole block of Wyong residential property at Delia Avenue Wyong my estate land, (as to the "fraudulent conversion" of my property, and the forgery of my signatures). 1. The second letter included the following: (1) The lands Department breached the "Lands Titles Act" against me causing the loss of Delia Avenue Wyong my estate fraud transactions of this property on 11 June 1977. And in 1981 this Wyong land is transferred again and the Lands Office and it is passed over the counter forgery and fraud to my name and signatures. The signatures on the land transfers are not mine but the forgery of a family member my sister Catherine on each occasion, the Lands Office breached the "Lands Titles Act" they have caused fraud conversion of my land over the counter. […] (3)The property is sold in 1981 to 8 Mr MacKinnon from Toukley and this is done without my knowledge. […] (5) At the time the property Delia Ave is transferred on 11 June 1977 I was out of the country […]. So, I had no knowledge of this transfer or that my name is on it. In 1981 when it was sold again, I was back in Australia and had no knowledge of any of these lands transactions, transfers, sale of the property to my name fraud, and forgery of my signatures. (6) […] My mother was at the Lands Office with my sister Catherine to do the Delia Ave transfer on 11 June 1977 and my maiden name Budd is forged by Catherine and then she also forged my married name Jemison, and mispelt [sic] my married name. […] 1. On 28 February 2007 there was a directions hearing before a registrar. It appears that Ms Budd's statement of claim with the two letters of 30 January 2007 annexed was placed on the Court file at that time but it was not then, or at any later time, stamped as filed. At the directions hearing the defendant informed the registrar of his intention to file a notice of motion seeking an order for summary dismissal of the proceedings under r 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. A direction was made that such a notice of motion should be filed by 6 March 2007. 2. Ms Budd sent a copy of her statement of claim and the two annexed letters dated 30 January 2007 to the defendant by facsimile on 28 February 2007 accompanied by approximately 30 additional pages of sundry material, of no apparent relevance. On 6 March 2007 the defendant filed a notice of motion seeking summary dismissal under r 13.4 and in the alternative dismissal for want of prosecution with due dispatch under r 12.7(1). In an affidavit supporting this application the defendant's employed solicitor deposed as follows: The Defendant cannot discern the nature of the cause of action pleaded. The Defendant cannot file a defence as it does not understand the documentation it has received on 28 February 2007.