The Court set aside proceedings commenced in the ACT as an abuse of process where the self-represented plaintiff had already commenced virtually identical proceedings against the same defendant in NSW seeking the same relief of $5,110,000. The Court held that where a plaintiff can obtain complete relief in the first-commenced proceedings, maintaining parallel proceedings in another jurisdiction is prima facie vexatious and oppressive, and in the absence of any satisfactory explanation, warrants summary disposal rather than merely a stay.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.