N'Ge-Sala v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWSC 1567 (7 November 2014)

Last Updated: 10 November 2014

Supreme Court New South Wales







Case Title: N'Ge-Sala v State of New South Wales







Medium Neutral Citation: [2014] NSWSC 1567







Hearing Date(s): 3, 4, 5, 6 November 2014







Decision Date: 07 November 2014







Before: McCallum J







Decision:



Publication of reserved reasons for dismissing proceedings







Catchwords: PROCEDURE - where plaintiff disrupting the orderly hearing of his claim - power under s 62 of the Civil Procedure Act to give directions as to the conduct of a hearing - direction to resume cross-examination - direction to stop singing - appropriate sanction where plaintiff refusing to engage with the processes of the court - proceedings dismissed







Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 61, 62



, r 12.7 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 , r 12.7







Category: Principal judgment







Parties: Sonni Michel Angelo N'Ge-Sala (plaintiff)



State of New South Wales (defendant)







Representation











- Counsel: Counsel:



Plaintiff self-represented



P Bodor QC, M Hutchings (defendant)







- Solicitors: Solicitors:



Makinson D'Apice (defendant)







File Number(s): 2011/405499







Publication Restriction: None



















JUDGMENT

HER HONOUR: Sonni N'Ge-Sala commenced proceedings in the District Court against the State of New South Wales in respect of an encounter with police on 21 December 2008. The proceedings were transferred to this Court to be heard together with separate proceedings arising out of the same incident commenced by Ms Susan Bandera.

The hearing of both proceedings commenced before me on Monday, 3 November 2014. On the third day of the hearing, the Court was informed that Ms Bandera's claim had been resolved on terms that there be a verdict for the defendant and that the parties bear their own costs. The hearing of Mr N'Ge-Sala's claim continued.

On 6 November 2014, I made an order dismissing Mr N'Ge-Sala's claim, reserving my reasons. These are my reasons for making that order.

Circumstances in which the claims were brought

There is no dispute that Ms Bandera suffered two gunshot wounds as a result of being fired upon by police on the night in question. Each plaintiff, however, gave a very different account of the events surrounding that incident.

Mr N'Ge-Sala says that he was making a phone call from a public phone booth when he felt someone stab him behind the right ear. He touched the point where he felt pain and found that he was bleeding. He saw a woman walking quickly away with an object in her hand. That woman was Ms Bandera. Mr N'Ge-Sala had not met her previously. He followed her and they had a confrontation during which she repeatedly tried to stab him. He thought that the object she was holding was a knife. In fact, it turned out to be a silver cocktail fork with three long, sharp prongs. Mr N'Ge-Sala called '000' and complained that he had been stabbed. He told the operator that the woman who had stabbed him still had a knife. He asked for police to attend urgently. Ms Bandera can be heard nearby shouting at Mr N'Ge-Sala during that call.

Ms Bandera's version of events is that she was walking home alone at about 1.30am after walking a friend home. She had consumed four stubbies of beer and smoked two joints over 12 hours. She walked past a reserve and saw Mr N'Ge-Sala talking on his mobile phone. She does not accept that he was in a public phone booth. She says that their eyes met and he said to the person to whom he was speaking "I'll call you back" before setting upon Ms Bandera and grabbing her around the throat. Ms Bandera stated that she thought she was going to be sexually assaulted. She stabbed Mr N'Ge-Sala with the cocktail fork, which she had in the pocket of her coat, and ran away.

It is common ground that Ms Bandera ran to the foyer of a nearby block of units with Mr N'Ge-Sala in pursuit. A number of residents of the units heard the disturbance and made '000' calls. Police attended within minutes. The information they had was sketchy, but it included reports (from both Mr N'Ge Sala and residents of the units) that the woman had a knife and that someone had been stabbed.

When the police arrived at the scene, Mr N'Ge-Sala and Ms Bandera were on a landing at the top of a narrow staircase of five stairs inside one of the entrances to the block of units. Mr N'Ge-Sala was holding Ms Bandera down and she was still holding the cocktail fork in her hand. After giving firm directions which they say were ignored, police used capsicum spray on both Mr N'Ge Sala and Ms Bandera. That caused Mr N'Ge-Sala to move away from Ms Bandera. He went through the door of an apartment (which had been opened by the occupant). Ms Bandera then began to get up. What was perceived by police was that she rushed down the stairs towards them with the object they believed was a knife held out in front of her. One of the police officers, believing that Ms Bandera posed an immediate mortal threat to another police officer, fired the two shots, each of which hit Ms Bandera.

Ms Bandera's case was that police deliberately assaulted her. Mr N'Ge-Sala's case was that police were in fact firing at him and that Ms Bandera was struck only due to the ricochet of the bullets. He believes that police have persecuted him since that date.

Conduct of the hearing

The first witness called in the proceedings was Ms Bandera. Her evidence began on the first day of the hearing and continued into the second day. She was cross-examined first by Mr N'Ge-Sala, who was representing himself. She was then cross-examined by Mr Hutchings on behalf of the State of New South Wales.

During the morning of the second hearing day, while Ms Bandera was still under cross-examination by Mr Hutchings, the parties sought time to pursue settlement negotiations. The discussions evidently continued throughout the day and I was ultimately asked to adjourn the proceedings to the next day.

At the outset of the third hearing day, I was informed that the proceedings brought by Ms Bandera had been resolved. The order was then made entering a verdict in favour of the State of New South Wales in those proceedings.

Mr N'Ge-Sala arrived late that morning. When he came into the courtroom, it became apparent that he was upset with me, evidently believing that, during the settlement negotiations the previous day, I had conspired to allow someone to go through his bag so as to have access to his information. He believed that his phone had been stolen from his bag during that time. Upon his arrival, Mr N'Ge-Sala and I had the following exchange:

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Ma'am, excuse me. You see, probably you do not like it me call you, ma'am. That's why I did say last time I'm not going to not call you your Honour because I do not know there is any honour in you. Probably you like me to call you woman.

HER HONOUR: I don't really mind what you call me, Mr N'Ge-Sala, but are you ready to proceed with your case? Can I tell you what's happened?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Yes. Tell me what has happened.

HER HONOUR: Ms Bandera's case has been resolved. She's not continuing with her case anymore, so it's just a question of your case continuing against--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Because of my case got - that's why yesterday somebody did get through my bag and take my phone with them. I tell you what, you know, you guys, how stupid you take the day off. You think I'm going to leave all the information that I'm doing inside the phone. That phone did not have a battery so whatever you are making it's fuel for the fire, you are putting. You are making into wars for yourself. By the time we talking now, by the time we talking like, you know, your brief of evidence is now behind - between the hand of the Russian Embassy so you--

HER HONOUR: Could you slow down? Could you slow down because I'm--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: What? Slow down for what?

HER HONOUR: Because I'm having trouble--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: There will be no slander. There will be no conspiracy. Wrong has been done to me. I am here for justice, so simple. Do you understand? I am here for justice and I know this guy, this guy they plot against me when the police pin the charge on me. Is your name not ..(not transcribable).. that's what your name. That's what your name, piece of shit; that's what your name. Do you think that you going to slander against me ..(not transcribable).. in Australia, what is coming at you? You going to ID. You pay probably to America. You think that you are strong. You pay probably to America. America won't be able to help you, I'm telling you.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge-Sala--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: You know, there will be no slander, there will be no discrimination. There will be not - again, there's nothing you can do so now we can proceed with my case. I will stand up now, won't sit down.

HER HONOUR: Could you please calm down?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I was down, calm down.

HER HONOUR: At the moment--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: There is something--

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge-Sala, can I please finish telling you--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: This is what the chamber - the international chamber against injustice, they ask me to tell you - they say - they ask me to tell you that I will no longer be tossed to and fro and carried a bag with every will of doctrine by your trickery in the cunning craftiness of the set for plotting. I will no longer walk with the rest of you with the futility of your mind because of your understanding which has been darkened been.

I will no longer be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by your trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting. I will long walk the rest of you with the futility of your because of your understanding which has darkened, being alienated from the life of God, your ignorance that is in you and the blindness of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. You keep on stealing even working every day with your hands. You have forgotten to edify yourself, that it may impart grace to the hearer. I wish that you were going to be imitate of God ..(not transcribable).. let anyone and ..(not transcribable).. but this I will tell you, I will never let anyone disable me with empty. Therefore I will never be ..(not transcribable).. with you and I will never have no fellowships with the ..(not transcribable).. of darkness but I would rather expose you for it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by you in secret.

Now we can proceed with my case. I won't sit down anymore, woman. You want to bring something, bring it on now. The Russian Embassy, they are aware. You guys, you are taking action against them the plane it go down with the Australian inside. Now, you know, the war is coming from the north - from the northeast, you see.

HER HONOUR: Do you feel ready to continue, Mr N'Ge-Sala?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I was well ready.

HER HONOUR: Mr Andrews [counsel for Ms Bandera], thank you for your assistance. You're excused. Are you going to give evidence, Mr N'Ge-Sala?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I am here for justice the very beginning, since we been floating and taking my phone inside my bag--

HER HONOUR: Would you mind going into the witness box then?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Sure.

HER HONOUR: Do you take an oath or an affirmation?

COURT OFFICER: Please stand? Do you take an oath or do you take an affirmation?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: What do you mean?

COURT OFFICER: Do you take an oath on the Bible?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Oath on what?

HER HONOUR: An oath on the Bible?

COURT OFFICER: On the Bible or do you not recognise it?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Recognise what? I recognise the Bible, that's the book of the Lord. What do you mean?

COURT OFFICER: Put it in your hand.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Yeah, you slander, you piece of shit. Swearing is what you been--

HER HONOUR: Excuse me? Excuse me? Do not talk to him--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Excuse me yourself. That's your--

HER HONOUR: Please remove him from the Court, please?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Excuse me yourself.

HER HONOUR: Come back when you are ready to be civilised to my staff.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I am civilised. You the one need to be civilised. You the one need to be civilised.

HER HONOUR: Thank you.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Do you hear that, woman?

HER HONOUR: Could you please remove Mr N'Ge-Sala from the Court.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I am civilised. You--

HER HONOUR: You can return when you are prepared to be civilised to the staff of the Court.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: You touch me, I knock you down.

SHERRIFF'S OFFICER: I'm not going to touch you, sir, please leave now.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Yeah, that's right, yes.

SHERRIFF'S OFFICER: You need to leave the courtroom.

HER HONOUR: Sit down, Mr N'Ge-Sala, and if you want to the oath you can take the oath now.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Get out of my face, piece of shit.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge-Sala, if you speak to anyone like that again I will have you taken downstairs.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: No, ma'am--

HER HONOUR: Please--

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: --you should do your job.

HER HONOUR: Please stop your language.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: You the one who push me. I was even nice to you. I came in the first day, you asked me to sit down I sit down. I did respect you since the very first day. Nobody will take advantage of me, do you hear that?

HER HONOUR: Do you want to take an oath or an affirmation?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I can never swear on him, is the Lord's throne. I can never swear on the earth, it's the Lord's footstool. I can never swear on my head, because I cannot make any of my head duck away. You hear that?

HER HONOUR: Would you like an affirmation?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I will my yes be yes and my no be no. I'm not a slander. I be concerned with your slandering. I did come here for the truth and for justice and you, you'll get picked up by the Interpol police. I got your name. They got your name over there.

HER HONOUR: Would you take an affirmation?

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: Affirmation for what? I will yes be yes and my no be no.

HER HONOUR: To tell the truth.

PLAINTIFF N'GE-SALA: I told you I will let my yes be yes and my no be no. I won't take no order in this way, slandering a so-called rubbish to your court.

HER HONOUR: We will take it that Mr N'Ge-Sala has taken an affirmation.

After endeavouring to encourage Mr N'Ge-Sala to start his case, I granted a short adjournment, at his request. Following the adjournment, the hearing proceeded, more or less in an orderly fashion.

During the course of his evidence in chief, Mr N'Ge Sala asked me to disqualify myself. I refused to do so. Mr N'Ge-Sala also stated that he believed that Mr Bodor QC, who appears with Mr Hutchings for the State of New South Wales, is in fact Peter Hlavac, the person Mr N'Ge-Sala says plotted against him to pin a false rape charge on him.

Mr N'Ge Sala completed his evidence. He did not call any other witnesses, saying that the truth is his witness (T183). Mr N'Ge Sala tendered a number of documents, which were admitted into evidence.

Mr Bodor then called his first witness, the police officer who had fired at Ms Bandera. At the conclusion of the day's hearing, that witness was under cross-examination by Mr N'Ge-Sala.

When the hearing resumed the following day, Mr N'Ge-Sala renewed his complaint about his bag being raided in the courtroom. He requested to see CCTV footage so that he could ascertain who took his phone. He also reiterated his concern that Mr Bodor was not in fact who he said he was and asked him to present his identification to the Court.

As to the first request, I informed Mr N'Ge-Sala that he should raise the issue with the security officers on the ground floor of the court building. I stated that I did not propose to call upon Mr Bodor to prove his identity. The exchange continued as follows:

PLAINTIFF: No, ma'am. That's not you or me, I would like to see his ID to see that he's really Bodor because he's - I know the guy, he's the one who was, you know, was plotting against me when the slandering police tried to pin a rape charge on me. You work - yeah.

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to take any steps to compel Mr Bodor--

PLAINTIFF: I would like - ma'am, I would like to know his identity. I would like him to provide me with his identity and--

HER HONOUR: I accept that he is who he says he is. Is the witness ready to go back into the witness box?

PLAINTIFF: Ma'am, before even the witness come in, I would like to see - Mr Bodor, I would like to see your ID.

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to compel him to do that, Mr N'Ge-Sala, I accept that--

PLAINTIFF: So he's not who he is.

HER HONOUR: I accept that he is who he says he is.

PLAINTIFF: Can I--

HER HONOUR: Could we please have the witness back in the witness box?

PLAINTIFF: No, no, ma'am, please, please. I would like to see the identity of Mr Bodor. I remember him, his name is Peter Hlavac. That's the same guy who was plotting against me when the police pin a rape charge on me.

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to take any steps in that respect, Mr N'Ge-Sala.

PLAINTIFF: Is that right? Yesterday I did show you my ID. I show this Court, I did provide this Court with my passport. If you want to see my birth certificate, I saw - I will provide for this Court too. So therefore, I would like to see the ID of Mr Bodor.

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to do that. Mr N'Ge-Sala, do you wish to ask further--

PLAINTIFF: Ma'am, there is nothing - I can never start nothing without the - see the ID of Mr Bodor, please.

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to ask--

PLAINTIFF: Remember, ma'am, remember to do your job or you want me go to your head office? True. I just go to your head office. I want to see the ID of Mr Bodor before we proceed.

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to cross-examine the witness further?

PLAINTIFF: Of course I do.

HER HONOUR: That's going to happen now. If you wish to do it--

PLAINTIFF: Ma'am, I would like to see the ID of Mr Bodor to provide his identity who he is. He says Mr Bodor. I'm remember Mr Bodor being the same barrister who was plotting against me when the police tried to pin a rape charge on me. It's just simple, ma'am. I got my ID here, you know, so--

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to ask Mr Bodor--

PLAINTIFF: So, please, I go - I will go to the - I will go ask the head office.

HER HONOUR: If you leave there's a risk that your proceedings will be dismissed. Do you understand that?

PLAINTIFF: My proceedings will be dismissed for what? You can't dismiss, I got your name.

HER HONOUR: Because you need--

PLAINTIFF: I got your name, woman McCallum. I got your name. I did ask you only for something simple, very simple. You can't dismiss my proceeding. You will be picked up like the white rubbish bag by the Interpol police. That's - I promise you. So simple, I only ask for one things. Remember what I did ask you yesterday, ma'am? Do you your job with the best of your ability, show no partiality? It's - or what in this courtroom? Show no partiality. You think you can try to intimidate me, try to take my phone and try to slander me and try to do things, I did came here for justice.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge-Sala, I don't think I'm the one trying to intimidate you. The matter is--

PLAINTIFF: Yeah, so that's why I would like you to do your job as - do your job as a judge. I would like to - I like Mr Bodor, or whatever his name is, to provide this Court with identify. That's so simple; it's going to take only one second. Only one second, ma'am.

HER HONOUR: The matter is listed for hearing. I'm going to proceed with the cross-examination of the witness.

PLAINTIFF: How can I proceed with the cross-examination if I did not see the ID of Mr Bodor, you know? I would like him to provide this Court who he is, because I know Mr Bodor is not who he is. He is, his name is Peter Hlavac. He's the guy who representing when the police pin a rape charge on me in the District Court, in the Downing Centre, ma'am. So simple. Please, ma'am. Madam McCallum, I'm asking for your understanding. It's all that I need. One second it's going to take, him to us his ID and then--

HER HONOUR: I'm not going to ask him to do that, Mr N'Ge-Sala. If you wish cross-examine the witness then that will happen now.

PLAINTIFF: I do not - I can never - how do you want me to work like that? So is it a slandering? So you showing partiality. You know who I am. Everybody know who I am. The guy is calling himself Mr Bodor. He is not Mr Bodor. He is not the person he say he is.

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to cross-examine the witness?

PLAINTIFF: I do not wish to cross-examine anyone before we - even we start, you know, I saw his ID. So simple. So since you say if I leave my case will be dismissed so I don't - I wish not to cross-examine anyone. I will stay here and whatever will happen after here I go to your head office. You know, so simple.

HER HONOUR: That's your choice, Mr N'Ge-Sala. I just want to know whether you wish to conclude the cross-examination.

PLAINTIFF: We - I miss out the Court. You asked to be here in time. I do my very best to come in time even after people try me not to - people try to keep me not to be here in time, you see.

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to cross-examine the witness?

PLAINTIFF: I am here. Of course, I am here. I wish to continue. Ma'am, I can't--

HER HONOUR: Yesterday the witness took an oath. Could you please administer the oath again? Thank you.

When I asked for the witness to be re-sworn, Mr N'Ge-Sala asked to see the Bible, which I allowed. He then took the bible to the door of the Court, where he said a prayer. The further cross-examination of the witness then proceeded for a short period of time before Mr N'Ge-Sala said that he needed a break. I allowed an adjournment of 40 minutes, as requested by Mr N'Ge-Sala.

Directions as to the conduct of the hearing

The hearing resumed at 11am. At that time, Mr N'Ge-Sala handed up a handwritten document he had apparently filed in the Registry during the adjournment. The document was framed as a further application for me to recuse myself on the grounds that I was showing partiality. I called upon Mr N'Ge-Sala to address the application but he remained silent, evidently refusing to address me any further. I refused the application.

Mr N'Ge-Sala then sought an adjournment, which I refused. Mr N'Ge-Sala then began to leave the courtroom. We had the following further exchange:

HER HONOUR: No, I'm not going to grant an adjournment and before you leave, you need to understand..

PLAINTIFF: I will I'll go ..(not transcribable)..

HER HONOUR: Can I just ask you to just listen to this before you leave? If you leave that will engage my power to dismiss the proceedings in your absence.

PLAINTIFF: I'm not leaving, I am I'm inside here but I'm saying not I'm not cross examining no one. You got a, you know, paper there with the stamp of this Supreme Court you know, so I will like to remove yourself out of my sight, woman.

Following those remarks, I gave a direction requiring Mr N'Ge-Sala to resume his cross-examination, if he had any further questions of the witness. I identified s 62 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 as the source of power for giving that direction. Mr N'Ge Sala stated that he would not proceed until he saw Mr Bodor's identification. I repeated the direction requiring Mr N'Ge-Sala to resume his cross-examination, if he had any further questions. He said:

PLAINTIFF: This is not an integral court case, since there have been slander and slander and conspiracy inside it. So I'm not considering it. So I'm rebuking this Court, this courtroom. I do not consider you. I do not consider your witness. I do not consider other people. So simple.

Eventually, after asking Mr N'Ge-Sala a number of times to resume the cross-examination, I excused the witness.

Mr Bodor then called a second witness, Constable Lawler. Mr N'Ge-Sala renewed his application for me to recuse myself, saying:

Woman McCallum, I say I am not continuing with me court case unless you remove yourself out of my sight. This is not your Supreme Court, you know what I'm say?

Mr N'Ge-Sala then suggested that, if I wanted to make some quick money, I could go in the street, put on some nice clothes and some high heels and "stop some car in the street" (T217).

After Detective Lawler was sworn to give evidence, Mr Bodor sought to have a sound recording played to him. While the recording was being played, Mr N'Ge-Sala began singing in what sounded like an African language. I asked him please to be quiet so that I could hear the evidence. The singing continued. It should be acknowledged that the singing was quite beautiful but it was preventing me from hearing the evidence. Accordingly, I directed Mr N'Ge-Sala to stop singing so that I could conduct the hearing, again relying on s 62 of the Civil Procedure Act. After some minutes, I warned Mr N'Ge-Sala that if he did not stop singing I would dismiss the proceedings. He stopped singing and started shouting at me. Our exchange proceeded as follows:

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala if you don't stop singing I'm going to dismiss the proceedings.

PLAINTIFF: You're going to dismiss, who's presenting this, this woman?

HER HONOUR: Please stop singing.

PLAINTIFF: What you going to do?

Mr N'Ge Sala then turned his attention to Mr Bodor. The exchange continued:

PLAINTIFF: Who are you? Who are you? Let me ask you, who are you?

HER HONOUR: Could you tender the

PLAINTIFF: I would like to know who you are. Who you are. Who are you? Who are you? You see, they got intruder inside the courtroom, there is somebody in disguise. The guy he says that is Bodor, he's not Bodor. I want to proceed with my case, that is my case. Wrong has been done to me, I've got the evidence here. They said they shoot two times but they shoot five times, okay?

HER HONOUR: Could you please

PLAINTIFF: I ask you, I ask you

HER HONOUR: Well, then you can proceed with

PLAINTIFF: Okay, I ask you, I ask you to provide this Court

HER HONOUR: it but you need to stop

PLAINTIFF: this courtroom, this Supreme Court room

HER HONOUR: You need to stop shouting

PLAINTIFF: with the ID of Mr Bodor

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala

PLAINTIFF: there's no problem, I want I got my ID with me

HER HONOUR: you need to stop shouting

PLAINTIFF: everybody that I spoken to got the ID. You know, I know the guy, the guy is the one who was plotting against me when the police tried to pin a rape charge on me

HER HONOUR: Do you need to lead any further evidence from Detective Lawler?

PLAINTIFF: okay? I would like him to show me his ID. His name is not the Bodor

BODOR: I don't think so.

PLAINTIFF: his name is I got my ID here, I got two of them.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala

PLAINTIFF: Okay one here, one here, Sonni N'Ge Sala and other one is the yeah, after I change my name, when the police did destroy my life, you see

HER HONOUR: Do you want to

PLAINTIFF: I got two ID, my both names

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to

PLAINTIFF: Mr Bodor must have his ID too, he can show this Supreme Court room his ID and then we can proceed with the case.

HER HONOUR: Did you wish to cross examine

PLAINTIFF: You making it hard for yourself, you do not understand

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to cross examine

PLAINTIFF: all I need a piece of paper, give me the piece of paper

HER HONOUR: Constable Lawler?

PLAINTIFF: for my court case, and I can show ..(not transcribable).. the piece of paper what they did give to me because the judge woman McCallum was plotting against me with the other ..(not transcribable).. we have an intruder inside the courtroom, all

HER HONOUR: If you wish to cross examine Constable Lawler, you need to start doing that

PLAINTIFF: ..(not transcribable).. justice is the only thing that I want. I did come here for justice, I did come here for that, I was

HER HONOUR: now.

PLAINTIFF: ordered, went down to Tasmania, then I cross the river, came back here to do my case, to deal with my case, so I want my case to be deal with the best of integrity.

HER HONOUR: I take it that Mr N'Ge Sala does not wish to cross examine Constable Lawler.

PLAINTIFF: The integrity. This is Australia, the time for ..(not transcribable).. is gone.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala

PLAINTIFF: ..(not transcribable).. is gone. This is a new era do you understand ma'am? Do your job woman, do your job with the best of your ability. I only want you to do your job. Do your job. Do your job. Okay? ..(not transcribable).. that's your problem. Okay, why you take ..(not transcribable).. justice, justice only, I'm seeking justice, ..(not transcribable).. I want to see the ID of Mr Bodor before we proceed. You understand? Mr Bodor is not Mr Bodor. Mr Bodor his name is Peter Hlavac. The very same lawyer or barrister was plotting against me with the police when they tried to pin a rape charge on me. I know him, okay? I got two ID. ..(not transcribable).. okay, I got people who I am, I want ..(not transcribable).. Supreme Court with his ID. The Supreme Court was made here before all of us. ..(not transcribable).. did pass through the Supreme Court

HER HONOUR: If you don't calm down and engage with the process

PLAINTIFF: no I am down, you the one needs to calm down. I am down.

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala if you don't calm down

PLAINTIFF: I am down. You the one need to calm down. Calm down. Take your blood your blood hands away from me, do you understand?

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to continue with your

PLAINTIFF: It is my case, I am here for that. I cross all the way, I cross the river from Tasmania

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to continue with the prosecution of your case?

PLAINTIFF: to come here, you understand? Give me a piece of paper I'll

HER HONOUR: I'm going to give you a last warning

PLAINTIFF: promise you, as long God will be alive as long God will be alive you be picked up like a wet rubbish bag by the Interpol police

HER HONOUR: I'm going to give you a last warning, if you don't calm down, I'm going to dismiss the case.

PLAINTIFF: You can dismiss, you can dismiss no, you be dismissed. You be confronted by a really white, white man

HER HONOUR: Do you wish to cross examine

PLAINTIFF: really judge, you will be taken to Europe.

HER HONOUR: Constable Lawler? Last chance, do you wish to cross examine Constable Lawler.

PLAINTIFF: This is my case, before I continue with my case

HER HONOUR: Last chance

PLAINTIFF: It is not your case slanderer

HER HONOUR: Last chance

PLAINTIFF: It is not your case conspirator conspirator

HER HONOUR: I'm about to dismiss your proceedings.

PLAINTIFF: it is my case. It is my case, before I continue to my case, I would like to see the ID of Mr Mr Hlavac.

HER HONOUR: I note that Mr N'Ge Sala is refusing to engage with the processes of the Court.

PLAINTIFF: I would like to see the ID of Mr Bodor, so simple, before we continue. There is there is in two days inside the Court, this is Supreme Court, but it's not you sir, please, this is Supreme Court not the ..(not transcribable).. court, not a Local Court, not a District Court, this is the Supreme Court. After the Supreme Court there's the High Court, after the High Court there's another court, you see, so we are in the Supreme let's all together

HER HONOUR: Mr N'Ge Sala you are refusing to engage with the process of the Court

PLAINTIFF: you are the one accusing you the one accusing, up yourself

HER HONOUR: I am about to dismiss your proceedings, do you understand?

PLAINTIFF: give me a piece of paper give me a piece of paper, it's all I want, give me a piece of paper.

HER HONOUR: The proceedings are dismissed. I reserve my reasons.

Power to dismiss proceedings

I have an obligation under s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act to seek to give effect to the overriding purpose of the Act of facilitating the just, quick and cheap determination of the real issues in the proceedings. I took the view that, in accordance with that obligation, I had to require Mr N'Ge-Sala to engage with the processes of the Court and to continue to conduct the hearing of his claim without undue disruption.

On several occasions during the hearing of the proceedings on Wednesday, 5 November 2014, I did not consider that Mr N'Ge-Sala was engaging appropriately or rationally with the processes of the Court. At times he threatened and insulted Mr Bodor and those who assist me in the courtroom, including the court officer and the Sheriff's officers. When I endeavoured to stop that from happening by asking that Mr N'Ge Sala be removed from the courtroom until he could be civilised towards court staff, he made a direct threat of violence to the three Sheriff's officers supporting me (see T117.17). He became calmer only when I acceded to his request to have them move away from him.

On Thursday 6 November 2014, having been allowed to present his own case without disruption, Mr N'Ge-Sala refused to allow the orderly presentation of evidence on behalf of the State of New South Wales unless Mr Bodor presented proof of his identity.

In light of the experience of the previous day, I took the view that the only practicable sanction available to me to maintain control of the proceedings was to make directions under s 62 of the Civil Procedure Act requiring Mr N'Ge-Sala to conduct the hearing in an orderly way. In the unusual circumstances of this case, I considered it necessary to direct Mr N'Ge Sala to resume his cross-examination of the defendant's first witness (if he had any further questions) and later had occasion to direct him to stop singing during the evidence of the defendant's second witness.

As the passages extracted above reveal, my directions were unsuccessful in conducing Mr N'Ge-Sala to prosecute his claim in an orderly and rational way, culminating in his shouting at me and otherwise wholly refusing to engage with the processes of the Court. I formed the view that it was futile to take any further steps to encourage Mr N'Ge-Sala to present his case. I was further of the view that to allow Mr N'Ge-Sala to continue to conduct his proceedings as he was posed a threat to the safety and integrity of the court.

Section 61 of the Civil Procedure Act confers express power to dismiss proceedings if a party to whom a direction under that section has been given fails to comply with the direction. That section is concerned with directions "for the speedy determination of the real issues between the parties" and is primarily directed to case management. Section 62 deals specifically with directions as to the conduct of hearings. That section does not expressly repeat the existence of a power to dismiss proceedings but plainly complements the provisions of s 61. Regard should also be had to rule 12.7 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, which confers power to order that the proceedings be dismissed if a plaintiff does not prosecute them with due despatch.

I took the view that it was within my power, either implicitly within the statutory powers to which I have referred or within the Court's inherent power to control its proceedings, to dismiss the proceedings on the basis that Mr N'Ge-Sala was wholly failing to engage with the processes of the court or to conduct the hearing of his claim in an appropriate and rational way. In all the circumstances, I considered that was the only available course in order to bring the proceedings to a close.

For those reasons, I dismissed the proceedings.

**********