Romas v Green

[2015] VSC 95

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS LIST

S CI 2014 5683

MELPOMENI ROMAS	Appellant
v
MICHELLE GREEN	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	DERHAM AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	12 March 2015
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	19 March 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Romas v Green
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 95

---

MAGISTRATES’ COURT – Appeal – Applicable principles – Magistrates’ Court Act 1989, s 109.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Supreme Court (General Procedure) Rules 2005, Rule 58.10(8) – Appeal from decision of a Magistrate on a question of law – No arguable case on appeal.

COSTS – Indemnity costs – Hopeless appeal.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Appellant	Mr Max Duncan, Solicitor.	Defteros Lawyers
For the Respondent	Mr R O’Neill	St Kilda Legal Service Co-op Ltd

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

Summary of Conclusions................................................................................................................. 2

Notice of Appeal................................................................................................................................. 2

Affidavits............................................................................................................................................. 3

Appellant........................................................................................................................................ 3

Respondent.................................................................................................................................... 5

Applicable law.................................................................................................................................... 8

Submissions and Consideration..................................................................................................... 9

Original Notice of Appeal........................................................................................................... 9

The Proposed Amended Notice of Appeal............................................................................ 12

Costs.................................................................................................................................................... 16

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................... 20

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1. These reasons concern an appeal under s 109 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989 (‘the Act’) against final orders made by his Honour Mr B Braun, Magistrate, at Melbourne on 23 September 2014.

1. At the same time as the Notice of Appeal was filed, the appellant filed a summons for directions in accordance with r 58.10(1) of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (‘the Rules’). Accompanying the Notice of Appeal and the summons was a short and somewhat deficient affidavit of Michael King, solicitor, in support of the appeal.

1. On the first return of the summons, the directions were adjourned (from 26 November 2014 to 28 January 2015). On 27 January 2015, the directions hearing set down for 28 January was adjourned to 27 February 2015. On 25 February 2015, the respondent filed submissions and a supporting affidavit of Jonathan Lyndon Risby, solicitor, of the St Kilda Legal Service Co-op Ltd. In that submission the respondent gave notice that, at the directions hearing on 27 February 2015, she would seek that the appeal be dismissed under r 58.10(8) of the Rules.

1. On 27 February 2015, the appellant was granted an adjournment for the purpose of considering the transcript of the proceedings which had just been obtained and exhibited to the affidavit of Kevin Dorey sworn 26 February 2015.  The appellant had previously informed the respondent’s solicitors that they had encountered delays in obtaining the transcript and wished their counsel to consider it before proceeding with the appeal.  In those circumstances, it was appropriate to give the appellant the opportunity to obtain advice as it seemed to the Court that the Notice of Appeal as formulated did not raise questions of law thrown up by the proceeding in the Magistrates’ Court.  An order was made requiring the appellant to file and serve any proposed amended Notice of Appeal by 9 March 2015.

1. No…