1Where a statutory discrimination claim under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) could not have been brought in earlier proceedings in another state's courts which lacked jurisdiction to hear such a claim, Anshun estoppel does not preclude the later proceeding, and it is not unreasonable for the plaintiff not to have pursued a speculative cross-vesting pathway to consolidate the claims.
2A proceeding is not an abuse of process merely because it arises from the same underlying dispute as earlier proceedings, where the later claim is different in character (a human rights complaint under beneficial legislation), has not been litigated or determined, and the plaintiff's awareness of the cause of action did not crystallise until findings in the earlier proceedings.
3The question of whether a party was 'on notice' of a potential discrimination claim, such that delay in commencing proceedings supports abuse of process, is a factual contest for trial where the party's direct evidence about when awareness arose bears greater probative weight than inferences the opposing party seeks to draw from contemporaneous correspondence.
