28. He is not entitled to re-litigate questions that have otherwise been determined in other fora.
29. The application in 2024/11158 discloses no reviewable decision and is otherwise an abuse of process. It shall be dismissed.
Prohibition on further application without leave
30. Given the nature of the Applicant's correspondence with the Tribunal by telephone and email, which the Tribunal notes are inappropriate and potentially unlawful,[1] the Tribunal has decided that he should be prohibited from lodging a further application in relation to the same subject matter without leave of the Tribunal.
DECISION
31. For the above reasons, the applications in 2024/10661, 2024/10673, 2024/11158 are each dismissed under s 101(1) of the ART Act. The Tribunal further orders under s 101(2) of the ART Act that the Applicant is prohibited from making a subsequent application for review in respect of the events of 31 October 2024 at Perth International Airport or his dispute with McDonald's Australia Limited, without leave of the Tribunal.
I certify that the preceding 31 (thirty-one) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of General Member Papalia
..........[SGD]..............................................................
Associate
Dated: 9 January 2025
- ↑ See Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 474.17.
Page 11 of 12
