Mark Eade appeared for the second respondent, instructed by Crown Solicitor.
The case dealt with an originating application seeking the principal relief of a declaration of incompatibility with human rights for ss 100 and 101 of the Domestic Violence and Family Protection Act 2012 (Qld) pursuant to s 53 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). The application arose from two police protection notices issued against the applicant, who alleged procedural failures and initiated private prosecutions against the issuing officers.
The central issues considered were whether the applicant’s proposed originating application was an abuse of process, frivolous or vexatious pursuant to r 15 of the Uniform Civil Practice Rules 1999 (Qld), and subsequently whether leave should be granted to the applicant to issue the originating application.
The Court held that the proposed originating process, if allowed, would constitute an abuse of process as it would impermissibly fragment the criminal proceedings already commenced by the applicant, and that the court’s discretionary jurisdiction to make a declaration of incompatibility will only arise where such a declaration is relevant to a question of law that is properly before it. The Court refused leave to issue.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
