Friday, May 15, 2026

CIV 1628 of 2026 — Supreme Court of Western Australia — Written Submissions Published for Public Transparency
2026 年 CIV 1628 案件 — 西澳大利亚州最高法院 — 为公众透明度而公开的书面陈述
CIV 1628 tahun 2026 — Mahkamah Agung Australia Barat — Hujahan Bertulis Diterbitkan untuk Ketelusan Awam

SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
CIV 1628 of 2026
IN CHAMBERS

IN THE MATTER OF

the Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA)

AND IN THE MATTER OF

an Application for Leave under s 6(1)

Applicant:
NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANT
(Leave Application under s 6(1) VPRA)

A. INTRODUCTION

These submissions are filed in support of the Applicant’s Fifth Application for leave under s 6(1) of the Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA) (“VPRA”).

The Application seeks leave to commence proceedings against:

  • The State of Western Australia; and
  • The Registrar of Titles as nominal defendant under s 201(3) of the Transfer of Land Act 1893 (WA) (“TLA”).

The proposed proceeding concerns:

  • the existence, content, and legal effect of a statutory implied easement arising under s 52 of the Property Law Act 1969 (WA) (“PLA”);
  • the extinguishment of that easement on 12 February 2016 without lawful authority;
  • deprivation of an estate or interest in land within ss 201(1) and 205(1) TLA; and
  • consequential loss, including the destruction of 31 items of plant and equipment registered under PPSR No. 20170412006511.

B. THE STATUTORY IMPLIED EASEMENT

1. Existence of the easement

Section 52 PLA creates a statutory implied easement of support, light, and air upon subdivision. Such easements arise automatically and do not depend on notation on the certificate of title.
Affidavit B.1: “Such easements arise automatically and do not depend on notation…”

The annotation “COV 52/98 Vol. 2 p. 93” on WAPC Form 26 (28 April 1998) records the statutory implied easement.
Affidavit B.2.

Mr Silas Kierath, Subdivisions Manager, confirmed by email dated 7 December 2020 that the annotation was added by Landgate as an administrative correction reflecting an existing statutory estate created by s 52.
Affidavit B.3.

The FOI Decision in CACV 88 of 2018 (pp 94–96) further confirms that the statutory implied easement existed at the time of subdivision and was recognised administratively by Landgate.
Affidavit B.4.

2. Extinguishment without lawful authority

The statutory implied easement was extinguished on 12 February 2016 by administrative error in the Titles Office.
Affidavit C.1.

The extinguishment was effected without lawful authority or compliance with the TLA.
Originating Motion C.1(i)–(ii).

The extinguishment deprived the Applicant of an estate or interest in land within the meaning of s 201(1) TLA.
Affidavit D.1.

C. CONTINUOUS PURSUIT SINCE 2016

The Applicant has continuously pursued recognition of the statutory implied easement and deprivation of estate since 2016 through four previous VPRA applications:

  • CIV 1973 of 2024 (Lemonis J)
  • CIV 1109 of 2026 (Gething J)
  • CIV 1279 of 2026 ([2026] WASC 90)
  • CIV 1495 of 2026 ([2026] WASC 157)

Affidavit C.2.

Each application was dismissed without determination of the central statutory issue.
Affidavit C.3.

On 5 May 2026, the Acting Principal Registrar granted permission for this Fifth Application to be filed.
Affidavit C.5; Originating Motion Ground 6(b).

D. JURISDICTIONAL ERRORS IN PRIOR DECISIONS

The reasons in [2026] WASC 157 did not address:

  • the Form 26 annotation;
  • the Kierath email;
  • the FOI Decision;
  • the PPSR registration;
  • the statutory chain of title.

Affidavit E.1.

The judgment did not reconcile the findings of the four previous applications as required by s 6(3)(a) VPRA.
Affidavit E.2.

These omissions constitute jurisdictional error and denial of procedural fairness.
Affidavit E.3.

E. DEPRIVATION OF ESTATE AND QUANTIFIED LOSS

The extinguishment of the statutory implied easement prevented the lawful exercise of rights attached to Unit 1/383, including support, light, air, access, and commercial utility.
Affidavit D.2.

Enforcement of the void Ward Order in MC/PER/CIV 10010/2020 resulted in the removal, sale, or destruction of 31 items of plant and equipment registered under PPSR No. 20170412006511.
Affidavit D

1 comment:

  1. ⭐ TRI‑LINGUAL PUBLICATION JUSTIFICATION (COMMENT BLOCK)

    **ENGLISH:**
    This written submission is lawfully published because it forms part of a public‑interest transparency archive concerning procedural fairness, regulatory conduct, and the handling of my matter by government agencies. I am the author and rights‑holder of this submission, and I am legally entitled to disclose my own statements, evidence, and correspondence. No confidentiality order, suppression order, or statutory prohibition prevents publication. All personal information disclosed relates to myself or is already publicly accessible through official channels. Publication is made in good faith for accountability, community awareness, and accurate public record‑keeping.

    **中文(简体):**
    此书面陈述依法公开发布,因为它属于公共利益透明档案的一部分,涉及程序公正、监管机构行为以及政府部门对我事项的处理。我是此陈述的作者及权利持有人,有合法权利公开我本人所作的陈述、证据及往来文件。不存在任何保密令、封禁令或法律禁止条款阻止公开。所有披露的个人信息均与我本人有关,或已通过官方渠道公开。此发布基于诚信原则,旨在促进问责、提升公众认知及确保公共记录的准确性。

    **BAHASA MELAYU:**
    Penyerahan bertulis ini diterbitkan secara sah kerana ia merupakan sebahagian daripada arkib ketelusan berkepentingan awam yang berkaitan dengan keadilan prosedur, tindakan pengawal selia, dan pengendalian perkara saya oleh agensi kerajaan. Saya ialah pengarang dan pemegang hak bagi penyerahan ini, dan saya berhak untuk mendedahkan kenyataan, bukti, dan surat‑menyurat saya sendiri. Tiada perintah kerahsiaan, perintah larangan, atau undang‑undang yang menghalang penerbitan. Semua maklumat peribadi yang didedahkan adalah mengenai diri saya atau telah pun tersedia secara umum melalui saluran rasmi. Penerbitan ini dibuat dengan niat baik demi akauntabiliti, kesedaran masyarakat, dan ketepatan rekod awam.

    ReplyDelete