In the Matter Of An Application BY Edward James Bride for Leave To Issue Or File

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GLEESON J
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY EDWARD JAMES BRIDE FOR LEAVE TO ISSUE OR FILE
[2024] HCASJ 17
Date of Judgment: 9 May 2024
P8 of 2024
ORDER
1.The ex parte application for leave to issue or file the application for removal is dismissed.

Representation
The applicant is unrepresented.

GLEESON J. By application dated 15 February 2024, the applicant ("Mr Bride") seeks leave to issue or file an application for removal of proceedings referred to as Supreme Court of Western Australia proceeding number CIV1981/2022 into this Court under s 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). On 3 January 2024, Beech-Jones J directed, pursuant to r 6.07.2 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), that the application for removal not be filed without prior leave of a Justice.
Mr Bride's application is supported by an affidavit affirmed by him on 15 February 2024. The affidavit exhibits two further affidavits made by Mr Bride, on 6 November 2023 and 10 January 2024.
The orders sought in the proposed removal application are that Mr Bride be given leave to: (a) "exercise his Constitutional right to a fair and proper hearing in an open and honest Court, untainted by fraud, deceit and dishonesty"; (b) "exercise his Constitutional right to be heard and allowed to refer to relevant authorities and Acts"; and (c) "have access to Fair and Natural Justice and due compensation for loss and damage caused to the Applicants [sic] by the Respondents...". There is nothing in the orders sought, or any other part of the proposed removal application, that identifies any matter in which this Court has original or appellate jurisdiction.
For this reason, the application is an abuse of process in the sense that it fails to identify any matter within the jurisdiction of the Court.[1]
[1]Re Young (2020) 94 ALJR 448 at 451; 376 ALR 567 at 570 [11].
It follows that Mr Bride's application filed on 28 February 2024 for leave to issue or file the application for removal must be dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Edward James Bride made an application in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia seeking leave to issue or file an application for removal. The application was made ex parte and without notice to the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, who is the primary respondent in the removal proceedings. The court was required to determine whether leave should be granted to Bride to proceed with his application for removal.

The court considered the appropriate test for granting leave to proceed ex parte. It held that the test is whether there are exceptional circumstances that make it just and convenient to grant leave without notice. The court found that such exceptional circumstances were not present in this case. It noted that the Secretary had not been given an opportunity to respond to the application and that the matter involved significant public interest considerations. The court concluded that it was not appropriate to grant leave without notice in these circumstances.

The court dismissed the application for leave to issue or file the application for removal. It noted that the matter could be reapplied for with notice to the Secretary if the applicant wished to proceed with the application. The court did not make any orders regarding the substantive application for removal, as that matter was not before the court.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established