George Vellisaris & Ors v Maryvell; Investments Pty Ltd (in Liquidation)

[2009] VSC 448

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA	Not Restricted
AT MELBOURNE PRACTICE COURT
No. 4484 of 2006
GEORGE VELLISARIS AND OTHERS	Applicant
v
MARYVELL INVESTMENTS PTY TLD (IN LIQUIDATION)	Respondent
AND OTHERS

---

JUDGE:	VICKERY J
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	1 OCTOBER 2009
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	1 OCTOBER 2009
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	GEORGE VELLISARIS AND ORS v MARYVELL INVESTMENTS PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ORS
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2009] VSC 448

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for leave to commence a proceeding pursuant to an Order made restricting the right to commence a proceeding – Order refused on the basis of incompetent pleading.

---

For the Applicant Mr G Vellisaris in person

_________________________________________________________________________________
HIS HONOUR:

1. Mr Vellisaris has expressed the view that this case is very important to him. I accept that submission.

2. By order made on 25 February 2009, in proceeding No. 4484 of 2006, Mr Justice Robson of this Court made the following orders:

   1.          The application of George Vellisaris of 29 July 2008 in this proceeding and each of the claims therein be stayed.

   2.          No further proceeding or process of any kind in the trial decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria, including this proceeding, concerning Maryvell Investments Pty Ltd in liquidation, the conduct of the liquidation, the liquidator or the property at 333 Sydney Road, Brunswick, be accepted for filing by the Prothonotary from George Vellisaris except with the prior leave of the Court.

3. The third order related to the payment of costs.

4. That order is still on foot and I am bound by that order. I am not in a position to consider an appeal in relation to that order.

5. Mr Vellisaris seeks leave to commence a proceeding in relation to the conduct of the liquidator of Maryvell Investments Pty Ltd in relation to the sale of the property at 333 Sydney Road in Brunswick. His central allegation, as stated in his affidavit sworn in support of this application, dated 21 September 2009, and as stated in the submissions that he has made to this Court, is that the liquidator sold that property at an undervalue.

6. Mr Vellisaris has exhibited to his affidavit his proposed writ in the proceeding and a proposed statement of claim. The statement of claim is in handwriting and occupies some 19 pages. I have read that statement of claim in its draft form. I have formed the view that it is not in proper form and it would be impossible for a defendant, served with such a document, to plead to it. For that reason I refuse the application but I will not order any costs in relation to it.

7. I order that:

   1.          The applicant’s application for leave to commence his proceeding is refused.

   2.          I make no orders as to costs.

8. The orders that I have pronounced are in respect of the applicant's application made by his summons dated 21 September 2009, supported by his affidavit dated 21 September 2009, and the exhibits thereto.

---