Stankovic v The Hills Shire Council

In the matter of Stankovic v The Hills Shire Council, the applicant sought leave to appeal the primary judge’s decision dismissing the applicant’s claims against the respondent. The interlocutory application, additional applications, and claims for pro bono legal assistance were all dependent on the outcome of the application for leave to appeal. The court was required to determine whether there was sufficient doubt in the primary judge’s decision to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court, and if the applicant had established any arguable error on the part of the primary judge.

The court considered the applicant’s various applications for a jury and found that since the primary judge proposed to dismiss the whole proceeding, those applications fell away. The court also examined the evidence presented in the interlocutory application and additional applications, and determined that the basis for the claimed relief now fell away. The court rejected certain paragraphs of affidavits as they were not relevant to the application for leave to appeal and the interlocutory application. The court also noted that the applicant’s attempt to file a Notice of Constitutional Matter after judgment had been reserved did not raise any viable constitutional matter and played no role in the determination of the case.

The court concluded that the applicant had not established that the primary judge’s decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court. The court was not satisfied that the applicant had established any arguable error on the part of the primary judge. The application for leave to appeal was refused, and the interlocutory application and additional applications were dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondents’ costs.