Granich Partners v Yap

[2003] WASC 206

Supreme Court of Western Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Vexatious litigants
3. › Application by private applicant for leave
4. › Criteria for leave to be granted
5. › Whether applicant seeking relief primarily for alleviation of unjustifiable burden
6. › Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA), ss 4, 6
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Vexatious litigants
3. › Whether respondent instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings
4. › Repeated attempts to re-litigate issues finally determined
5. › Objective and subjective tests for vexatious proceedings
6. › Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA), s 3
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Vexatious litigants
3. › Scope of orders under Act
4. › Whether orders can extend to proceedings in federal courts or High Court of Australia
5. › Relief limited to courts and tribunals of Western Australia
6. › Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA), s 4
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Vexatious litigants
3. › Relevance of conduct in federal jurisdictions
4. › Whether conduct in federal courts may be considered in determining whether proceedings in State courts are vexatious
5. › Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA), s 4(1)(a)

Quick Take

A private applicant seeking leave under s 4(2)(c) of the Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA) must show they are seeking relief primarily for the alleviation of an unjustifiable or exceptional burden caused by the respondent's litigation, not merely as a tactical exercise. Orders under the Act cannot extend to proceedings in federal courts or the High Court. Relief granted to a private applicant should ordinarily be tailored to protect that applicant rather than imposing a general prohibition on all proceedings by the vexatious litigant.