Hamilton v Russell Kennedy Pty Ltd

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS LIST

S CI 2014 00047

JULIAN ROHAN HAMILTON	Appellant
v
RUSSELL KENNEDY PTY LTD	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	DERHAM AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	14 March 2014
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	15 December 2014
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Hamilton v Russell Kennedy Pty Ltd
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VSC 630	First Revision: 16 February 2015

---

APPEAL – Appeal from Magistrates’ Court – Whether questions of law appropriately and sufficiently disclosed – No questions of law disclosed – Magistrates’ Court Act 1989, s 109.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Self-represented litigant a barrister – Extent to which Associate Judge required to assist self-represented litigant.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Appellant	In person
For the Respondent	Mr A Hamlyn-Harris	Russell Kennedy

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1

Affidavits............................................................................................................................................. 1

Self-Represented Litigant................................................................................................................. 3

Background Facts............................................................................................................................... 5

The Application in the Magistrates’ Court................................................................................ 5

History of the Proceedings.......................................................................................................... 6

The Costs Proceeding......................................................................................................... 8

Invalidity Proceedings...................................................................................................... 10

Application for Leave to Appeal the SM Vassie Decision.......................................... 11

The Magistrate’s Reasons............................................................................................................... 14

Applicable law.................................................................................................................................. 17

Submissions and Consideration................................................................................................... 18

Russell Kennedy......................................................................................................................... 18

Rohan Hamilton’s Submissions................................................................................................ 20

The Notice of Appeal................................................................................................................. 23

Question 1 and Ground 1................................................................................................. 23

Consideration........................................................................................................ 24

Question 2 and Ground 2................................................................................................. 26

Consideration........................................................................................................ 26

Question 3 and Ground 3................................................................................................. 26

Consideration........................................................................................................ 27

Question 4 and Ground 4................................................................................................. 28

Consideration........................................................................................................ 28

Question 5 and Ground 5................................................................................................. 28

Consideration........................................................................................................ 29

Question 6 and Ground 6................................................................................................. 29

Consideration........................................................................................................ 30

Question 7 and Ground 7................................................................................................. 30

Consideration........................................................................................................ 30

Question 8 and Ground 8................................................................................................. 31

Consideration........................................................................................................ 31

Rohan Hamilton’s Central Issue................................................................................................... 32

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................... 36

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1. The Appellant (‘Rohan’) has filed a Notice of Appeal[1] against a decision of the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria, at Melbourne, striking out and permanently staying a proceeding commenced by him against, amongst others, the Respondent (‘Russell Kennedy’).[2]

   [1]Filed 9 January 2014.

   [2]Proceeding No C12914531.  The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria was served with the Notice of Appeal and by letter dated 13 January 2014 entered an appearance and advised that it did not intend to take an active role in the proceeding and will abide by the decision in R v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal ex parte Hardiman & Others.

1. The questions of law in the Notice of Appeal, and the grounds advanced in support of them, are difficult to follow and have been attacked by Russell Kennedy as not identifying any question of law, sufficiently or at all. Russell Kennedy accordingly applied under rule 58.10(8) of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (‘the Rules’) for the appeal to be dismissed.

1. The orders of the Magistrates’ Court were made by Magistrate Braun on 10 December 2013. The Notice of Appeal was filed in accordance with the Rules on 9 January 2014. In substance, Magistrate Braun struck out and permanently stayed the Magistrates’ Court proceeding on the basis that it did not disclose a cause…