Richards v Transport Accident Commission

[2003] VSC 74

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

PRACTICE COURT

No. 3773 of 2003

JASON RICHARDS
	Plaintiff
v.
TRANSPORT ACCIDENT COMMISSION	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	MANDIE, J.
WHERE HELD:	MELBOURNE
DATE OF HEARING:	13 March 2003
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	13 March 2003
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2003] VSC 74

---

PRACTICE and PROCEDURE – Master performing function of Registrar of Court of Appeal – no appeal therefrom to Judge of Trial Division.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	In person
For the Defendant	Mr Lay	TAC Law

HIS HONOUR:

1. I have before me a notice of appeal dated 27 February 2003, brought by an appellant in person.  He seeks to appeal against what he describes as a decision of Master Dowling made on 27 February 2003.  The decision, so called, is actually constituted by some directions given by the Master on 27 February, settling the contents of the appeal book and directing that the appellant prepare the appeal book and deliver a certain number of copies to the Registrar and a certain number of copies to the solicitors for the respondent.

1. The document attached to the blue form is in terms of the court ordering various things.  However, when one looks at Order 64, it appears that under r.64.11 the appellant is to prepare the appeal book in accordance with the directions, rather than the orders, of the Registrar, and certain notes published under the rule, and it is also for the Registrar to determine the number of copies of the appeal book which have to be delivered.  The power of the Master to deal with matters which are vested primarily in the Registrar of the Court of Appeal is contained in r.64.28, which says that in the absence of the Registrar, or at his request, any Master may exercise any power or authority conferred on the Registrar.  So the Master is not exercising any power of his own but he is exercising the power of the Registrar. 

1. There is no provision in the Rules for an appeal from the Registrar to a Judge of the Trial Division, but what the Rules do provide is, in r.64.21, that notwithstanding any direction given by the Registrar, the Court of Appeal may at any time of its own motion or on application give directions in relation to an appeal, application or other proceeding before it.  So that the recourse, I think, which Mr Richards has in this matter – and I am simply expressing my own view here – is to make an application to the Court of Appeal, which can constitute itself in whatever way is thought appropriate, whether it be one judge or more than one judge I would not know, and the court has power, notwithstanding any direction given by the Registrar, to give directions.  So although there is no provision for appeal from the Registrar, the Court of Appeal has overriding power, as I read the Rules, to give directions which may even be contrary to those already given by the Registrar.

1. Be that as it may, I am persuaded that a single judge in the Trial Division certainly has no jurisdiction to hear any appeal from the Registrar (or the Master performing his functions) and the purported appeal by the notice of appeal is dismissed.

---