Paula Jensen v Bank of Queensland Limited

PAULA JENSEN
v
BANK OF QUEENSLAND LIMITED
[2012] HCASL 72
S40/2012

The applicant seeks special leave to appeal against orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Hodgson, McColl and Macfarlan JJA) refusing the applicant's application for leave to appeal against orders of a single judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Davies J), and dismissing the applicant's notice of motion seeking, among other things, a stay of all orders against the applicant.
On 29 September 2009, the respondent obtained a default judgment against the applicant for possession of a property which was the subject of a mortgage in favour of the respondent. On 13 May 2010, Davies J dismissed notices of motion filed by the applicant seeking, among other things, to set aside the default judgment on the grounds that the applicant was not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Court because she had seceded from New South Wales and Australia, and that the default judgment had been irregularly obtained.
On 24 February 2011, the Court of Appeal (Beazley and Macfarlan JJA) refused the applicant's application for leave to appeal against the decision of Davies J. This Court refused the applicant's application for special leave to appeal against that decision of the Court of Appeal[1].
[1]Jensen v Bank of Queensland Limited [2011] HCASL 92.
On 6 May 2011, a differently constituted Court of Appeal (Hodgson, McColl and Macfarlan JJA) dismissed a further application by the applicant for leave to appeal against the decision of Davies J and an application for a stay of all orders against the applicant. Hodgson JA, with whom the other members of the Court agreed, noted that exceptional circumstances must be demonstrated for leave to appeal to be granted on a second application. No such circumstances were demonstrated.
As the applicant is unrepresented, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.
The applicant's written submissions raise no arguable case of error in the courts below. An appeal to this Court would have no prospects of success.
Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

8          K.M. Hayne

9          10 May 2012

10                   S.M. Crennan

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Paula Jensen sought special leave to appeal against the decisions of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales and a single judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central dispute involved a default judgment obtained by the Bank of Queensland Limited against Jensen for possession of a property that was subject to a mortgage in favour of the bank. Jensen contended that she was not amenable to the jurisdiction of the court and that the default judgment was irregularly obtained. The Court of Appeal had twice refused Jensen's applications for leave to appeal and to stay the orders against her.

The legal issues at the core of this appeal concerned whether the Court of Appeal had correctly exercised its discretion in refusing Jensen's applications. Specifically, the Court had to determine if there were exceptional circumstances that warranted a second appeal or a stay of the orders against Jensen. The court also had to consider whether there was an arguable case of error in the lower courts' decisions and whether an appeal to the High Court would have any prospects of success.

In its reasoning, the High Court observed that the Court of Appeal had correctly applied the legal principles regarding the grant of leave to appeal and the imposition of stays. The Court found that the applicant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances to warrant a second appeal, nor had she shown that there was an arguable case of error in the lower courts' decisions. Consequently, the High Court determined that an appeal to the Court would have no prospects of success. The Court further noted that the applicant's submissions did not present a viable case for special leave to appeal.

The High Court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal, with the Registrar instructed to prepare, sign, and seal the order of dismissal. This decision upheld the previous rulings that no exceptional circumstances were present to allow for further appeals or stays against the orders obtained by the Bank of Queensland Limited.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established