Jacqueline Rose v Frankston City Council

[2014] HCASL 10

JACQUELINE ROSE

v

FRANKSTON CITY COUNCIL

[2014] HCASL 10

M113/2013

1. The applicant seeks special leave to appeal against orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria, refusing the applicant leave to appeal from an interlocutory decision.

2. The applicant instituted proceedings against the respondent in the County Court of Victoria, claiming damages for negligence and misfeasance in public office. The County Court (Judge Misso) granted summary judgment on an application by the respondent under s 62 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic), on the ground that the applicant's amended statement of claim did not disclose a tenable cause of action and therefore the plaintiff's case had no real prospect of success. The Court of Appeal (Hansen and Tate JJA) refused the applicant leave to appeal, finding that the applicant's case had no real prospect of success.

3. As the applicant does not have legal representation, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

4. Neither in her original written case nor in further material filed more recently does the applicant address any questions of law which would justify a grant of special leave to appeal.  We see no reason to doubt the correctness of the conclusions reached by the Court of Appeal.  An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospects of success.

5. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 of the High Court Rules 2004 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

K.M. Hayne
12 February 2014 S.M. Crennan