Federal Court of Australia – Refusal (13 August 2024)

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
REGISTRY
A.B.N. 49 110 847 399

Your Ref:
Our Ref:

13 August 2024

Mr Jan Marek Kant
By email only: jmjarosz01@gmail.com

Dear Mr Kant,

Re: Documents presented for filing 27 July (lodgement ID 1349181)

I refer to the Originating Application and Affidavit submitted to the Victoria Registry of the Federal Court on 27 July 2024 (collectively, the Documents)

The Documents were referred to me as National Duty Registrar to review and determine whether they should be accepted for filing. I have decided that the Documents should be refused for filing in accordance with r 2.26 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (the Rule). These are my reasons for doing so.

The Rule provides that:

A Registrar may refuse to accept a document (including a document that would, if accepted, become an originating application) if the Registrar is satisfied that the document is an abuse of the process of the Court or is frivolous or vexatious:
a) on the face of the document; or
b) by reference to any documents already filed or submitted for filing with the document.

The Document seek injunctions under Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (Cth) against the Director of the United States Central Intelligence Agency and the Australian Information Commissioner requiring them to provide material you say is held by

them. Pursuant to s 119 of the RP(SP) Act an application under Part 7 can only be brought by an ‘authorised person’. Accordingly, I am satisfied that on the face of the Documents they are doomed to fail and, if accepted, would be an abuse of process.

Further, as summarised by White J in Ferdinands v Registrar Cridland [2021] FCA 592 ‘a proceeding will be frivolous and vexatious if, amongst other things, it is based on a cause of action which no reasonable person could properly treat as bona fide or if it is without substance, groundless, or fanciful’: at [30]. I am satisfied that the Documents are without substance and fanciful.

I refuse to accept the Documents for filing in accordance with the Rule.

If you disagree with this decision, it is open to you to make an application for judicial review of this decision under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth). I would encourage you to seek independent and professional legal advice on these matters.

The Documents are returned to you.

Yours sincerely,

Thomas Stewart
National Registrar