Karam v Palmone Shoes Pty Ltd - [2014] VSC 378

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION
PRACTICE COURT

S CI 2009 09926

AKRAM KARAM	Appellant
v
PALMONE SHOES PTY LTD (ACN 005 663 141)	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	GINNANE J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	17 July 2014
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	17 July 2014 (revised)
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Karam v Palmone Shoes Pty Ltd
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VSC 378

---

APPEAL – Decision of Associate Justice – Dismissal of application for payment out of moneys paid into court pursuant to order of Judge – Associate Justice bound by order.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Alleged failure to provide reasons – Alleged failure to provide procedural fairness – Grounds not established – Appeal dismissed.

---

APPEARANCES:

Counsel

Solicitors

For the Appellant

In person

For the Respondent

For Lennon Mazzeo

Ms E Cannon (solicitor)

Mr D Begg (solicitor)

Minter Ellison

Lennon Mazzeo

HIS HONOUR:

Mr Akram Karam appeals against an order of Associate Justice Zammit made on 8 May 2014, dismissing his application dated 6 January 2014. That application was for an order for payment out to him of funds held in court. He states in that application of 6 January 2014 that he is applying for an order that the award of damages in this proceeding — which award was paid into the Funds in Court Office and held in the Senior Master’s Fund — be paid to him in order for him to be able to appoint a lawyer to act on his behalf in matters in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the Magistrates’ Court. He has been put on a waiting list for eye surgery due to the blackout in his eye and this makes it very difficult for him to represent himself. He states that the order made by T Forrest J on 23 February 2010 to pay the order for damages into court to be held by the Senior Master pursuant to s 113(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) was wrong, unreasonable and caused prejudice and injustice when:

(a)it did not comply with s 113 of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic), in particular that Mr Karam obviously was not a disabled person within the meaning of s 66(3) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 (Vic);
(b)T Forrest J was in error in principle in making the orders dated 23 February 2010 in awarding Lennon Mazzeo and Aloe & Co Pty Ltd a lien over the proceeds of the judgment sum in this proceeding.

Mr Karam’s application then proceeds in considerable detail to make a case as to why neither Lennon Mazzeo nor Aloe & Co were entitled to a lien over the judgment sum in this proceeding.

Her Honour Associate Justice Zammit dismissed Mr Karam’s application on 8 May 2014. The Notice of Appeal, again, restates the errors that are alleged to have been made by T Forrest J. It then alleges that Zammit AsJ failed to provide any reasons to justify…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Karam v Palmone Shoes Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2014] VSC 378
Decision Date: 17 July 2014 (revised)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Karam v Palmone Shoes Pty Ltd, the applicant sought an order for payment of money held by the respondent, which had been paid into court under a prior order of a Judge. The application was dismissed by an Associate Justice, leading to the applicant's appeal to the Federal Court of Australia. The applicant contended that the Associate Justice erred in dismissing the application, arguing that the order was not binding and that there were procedural irregularities in the original decision-making process.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Associate Justice was bound by the prior order of the Judge, and whether the applicant had established any grounds for the appeal, specifically concerning the alleged failure to provide reasons and the denial of procedural fairness. The court examined the applicable legal principles regarding the binding nature of interlocutory orders and the requirements for procedural fairness in administrative law contexts.

The court held that the Associate Justice was indeed bound by the prior order of the Judge and that the applicant had not established any valid grounds for the appeal. The court found that the applicant's arguments concerning the alleged failure to provide reasons and the denial of procedural fairness were not substantiated. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the applicant's contentions were rejected. The court did not find it necessary to order costs against the applicant.

Orders