Stankovic v The Hills Shire Council (No 2)

[2012] FCA 522

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Stankovic v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2012] FCA 522

Citation:	Stankovic v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2012] FCA 522
Parties:	MICHAEL STANKOVIC v THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL, TERRY GRANT VAN DER VELDE and JASON SHANE CRONAN
File number:	NSD 690 of 2011
Judge:	EMMETT  J
Date of judgment:	4 May 2012
Date of hearing:	4 May 2012
Place:	Sydney
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	4
Counsel for the applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the first respondent:	M Condon
Solicitor for the first respondent:	M Pearce of The Hills Shire Council
Counsel for the second and third respondents:	D Ash
Solicitor for the second and third respondents:	Watson & Watson
Solicitor for Kent Attorneys:	T Orlizki of Kent Attorneys

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 690 of 2011

BETWEEN:

MICHAEL STANKOVIC
Applicant

AND:

THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL
First Respondent

TERRY GRANT VAN DER VELDE
Second Respondent

JASON SHANE CRONAN
Third Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT  J
DATE OF ORDER:	4 MAY 2012
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The applicant’s application for leave to amend his application for leave to file and serve out of time be refused.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 690 of 2011

BETWEEN:

MICHAEL STANKOVIC
Applicant

AND:

THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL
First Respondent

TERRY GRANT VAN DER VELDE
Second Respondent

JASON SHANE CRONAN
Third Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT  J
DATE:	4 MAY 2012
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant has applied for leave to amend his application for leave to file and serve a notice of appeal out of time.  The original application was filed on 19 May 2011.  There is annexed to the application a draft notice of appeal, the grounds of which are as follows:

   1.“Compensation monies received by the Applicant/Appellant were not considered when sequestering my estate” [sic]

   2.“Pursuant to s116[2] Bankruptcy Act 1966 [Cth], protected monies are exempt the provisions of s116[1]” [sic]

   3.“Compensation monies are protected monies” [sic]

2. The proposed amended notice of appeal would add the words “and protected properties” to ground 3.  That would make no sense, and would add nothing to the substance of the ground.  The proposed amended notice of appeal would also join the State of New South Wales as Fourth Respondent, and the Commonwealth of Australia as Fifth Respondent, and would add ground 4 as follows: 

   4.“The First Respondent, The Hills Shire Council, is not “Local Government” because the Referendum of 1988, to establish and continue Local Government was defeated thereby abolishing Local Government throughout the Commonwealth of Australia, and the Fourth and Fifth Respondents, the State of New South Wales and the Commonwealth of Australia, are vicariously liable for unlawful legislation that attempts to establish and continue Local Government” [sic] 

3. To grant leave to amend by joining the Commonwealth and the State and including paragraph 4 would be futile.  The proposed ground 4 appears to proceed on the basis of a complete misapprehension as to the effect of the failure of a referendum in 1988.  Had the referendum been passed, power to legislate with respect to local government would have been conferred on the Commonwealth Parliament.  That power presently resides in the State Parliament.  The failure of the referendum had no effect on the power of the State.  It certainly did not have the effect of invalidating State legislation establishing local councils.  It did not have the effect of abolishing local government or local councils established under valid State legislation. 

4. The application for leave to amend should be refused.  There is no need for the State’s representative to remain in Court. 

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.

Associate:

Dated: 25 May 2012