//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2002] VSCA 73
Court of Appeal (Vic)
2002-05-17
BATT and EAMES, JJ.A.
Original judgment source is linked above.
the applicant, or appellant as I have been calling him. The appellant has invoked Order 56 of Chapter I of the Rules on a matter which failed completely before the primary judge, and this Court has taken the view that leave has not been shown to be appropriate. Costs this case, we think, should be payable, although it originates out of criminal charges, and they should follow the event.
1. The application for leave to appeal made orally this day is refused with costs.
2. The application for a stay made by summons filed 28 March 2002 is refused.
3. The appeal by notice of appeal filed 28 March 2002 is dismissed as incompetent.
[1] [1966] HCA 36; (1966) 117 C.L.R. 423 at 443.
[2] Unreported, Appeal Division, 7 March 1995 at p.2 Special leave to appeal refused, 9 June 1995.
[5] Unreported, Court of Appeal, 17 April 1997 at p.7.
Kassionis
The Magistrates' Court of Victoria & Hanley [2002] VSCA 73