Vexatious proceedings

Anyone who frequently and persistently takes legal action without reasonable grounds or for improper purposes can be subjected to a vexatious proceedings order under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008(the Act)

Table of vexatious proceedings

All vexatious proceedings orders are published in the Government Gazette and recorded on the Supreme Court's website.

Individuals currently considered vexatious at the Supreme Court of NSW

Individuals (alphabetical) considered vexatious under s 84 of the Supreme Court Act 1970:

Bar-Mordecai, Michael Jacob
Betts, Craig Andrew
Bhattacharya, Pranay Kumar
Caldar, Russell (also known as Russell Graham Gittoes)
Gittoes, Russell Graham (also known as Russell Caldar)
Jambrecina, Drago
Kanak, Dominic Wy
Spautz, Michael Edward
Tsekouras, Con
West, Raymond Stanley
Witt, Frank Raleigh

This is a reference to section 84 of the Supreme Court Act 1970. Section 84 was repealed when the Vexatious Proceedings Act commenced on 1 December 2008. You can access historical versions of the Supreme Court Act 1970 from the NSW Legislation website: www.legislation.nsw.gov.au

Individuals involved in vexatious proceedings under the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008:

Altaranesi, Tareq
Batterham, Peter James
Budd, Pamela Joan Theresa
Cameron, Rita
Chan, Yau Hang
Clarke, Sharmain Daisy
Collier, Marion Louise
Croker, Clayton Robert
De Varda, Joseph
Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd
Enterprise INT Pty Ltd
Ferella, Angelo
Fleet, Robert
Fokas, Maria
Gargan, Peter Alexander
Jarvie, Russell Alan
Jemmott, Ronald
Klewer, Lucy Patricia
Kostov, Adriana
Kwon, Ki Bun
Laprini, Allan Stephen
Macatangay, Miguela Alvarez
McGettigan, John Patrick
Mahmoud, Tosson
Markisic, Dragan
Martin, Anthony Gilbert
Mehajer, Salim
Mohareb, Nader Nabil Sedra
One T Development Pty Ltd
Proietti, Philip
Potier, Malcolm Huntley
Quach, Michael Van Thanh
Rahman, Mohammad Tabibar
Rouvinetis, Evangelos
Satchithanantham, Thambiappah (Mr)
Satchithanantham, Hemelathasothy (Mrs)
Sebie, Robert
Sebie, Robert (ENA Development Pty Ltd, May 2023)
Seidler, Kathryn
Singh, Gurjit
Singh, Jagjit
Stankovic, Milovan
Teoh, Elaine
Tov-Lev, Rabbi Samuel
Viavattene, Beverley Georgina
Viavattene, Peter Steven (13.3.15)
Viavattene, Peter Steven (3.7.14)
Viavattene, Peter Steven
Wang, Yun Fu
Williamson, Hugh Francis Arthur
Wilson, John
Zepinic, Vitomir
Zepinc, Nina
Zepinic, Milla

Definition

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

Which courts can make vexatious proceedings orders?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

Who can apply for an order?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

What orders can the court make?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

When can a court make an order?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

Notification of orders

All vexatious proceedings orders are published in the Government Gazette and recorded on the Supreme Court's website.

What happens if new proceedings are commenced contrary to orders?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

How do I seek leave to commence proceedings if I am subject to a vexatious proceedings order?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

How did the concept of vexatious proceedings develop and where can I find the relevant test?

Section 6 of the Act defines vexatious proceedings:

(a) proceedings that are an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal, and

(b) proceedings instituted to harass or annoy, to cause delay or detriment, or for another wrongful purpose, and

(d) proceedings conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment, or achieve another wrongful purpose.

Last updated:

29 Apr 2024