Lee v Magat
[2024] VCC 664
•15 May 2024
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE COMMON LAW DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
APPEALS AND POST SENTENCE APPLICATIONS LIST
Case No. AP-23-0851
| William LEE | Plaintiff |
| v | |
| Ken MAGAT | Defendant |
---
JUDGE: | His Honour Judge Pillay | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 15 May 2024 | |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 15 May 2024 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | Lee v Magat | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 664 | |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
---
Subject:Appeal against Personal Safety Intervention Order
Catchwords: Legal, factual or discretionary error – self represented litigant
Legislation Cited: Personal Safety Intervention Orders Act 2010 (Vic)
Cases Cited:AAA v County Court of Victoria & Ors [2023] VSC 13
Judgment: Appeal dismissed.
---
APPEARANCES: | |
| For the Plaintiff | Mr William Lee (in person) |
| For the Defendant | Mr Ken Magat (in person) |
HIS HONOUR:
1The appellant in this proceeding, Mr Lee, appeals the order made in the Magistrates’ Court on 5 June 2023. On this day, Mr Lee was granted a final personal safety intervention order (“PSIO”) against the respondent, Mr Magat. At this hearing, Mr Magat consented to an order being made against him. Mr Lee agreed to the final order being made in his favour. A final order was made on this date for a period of 12 months. For some reason Mr Lee has appealed.
2Pursuant to the principles in AAA v County Court of Victoria & Ors (“AAA”)[1] in order for the jurisdiction of this Court to be enlivened, the appellant must demonstrate there has been a legal, factual or discretionary error in the decision in the Magistrates’ Court below. The grounds of the appeal are patently hopeless. The appellant was wholly successful in his application and agreed to the terms of the order made in his favour against Mr Magat. There is simply no factual, legal or discretionary error. To entertain the grounds of this appeal further is to waste precious Court resources on a wholly unmeritorious claim. For this reason, I dismiss the appeal.
[1] [2023] VSC 13
0