Page 1

Mr Garry McIntosh, Associate to His Honour Mullaly J.

judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au

14-11-2015

Re: 20151114-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Associate Mr Garry McIntosh

to His Honour Mullaly J County Court of Victoria-Re APPEAL-15-2502
Sir,

on Friday 30 October 2015 I appeared before His Honour Mullaly J, against whom I
filed on 31 October 2015 with His Honour Peter Kidd CJ a Judicial review request, but in
the meantime I view both parties are bound by the orders of His Honour Mullaly J.
I in 1985 designed the concept of the ADDRESS TO THE COURT, as a form of written submissions, and it
has since been used in all levels of courts including the High Court of Australia.

It may be stated that counsel appearing for Buloke Shire Council in my view was arrogant not
even introducing himself and/or providing a business card as to his identity. Surely the court
ought to set minimum common decency standards?
On written request of the witness for Buloke Shire Council (Mr Wayne Wall) I had a meeting
with him (and he had along another person) at my property and it became clear to me the man
hasnt got a clue about the legal provisions relevant to his position. His Honour raised the issue
not wanting to waste court time, well boy, is the court system abused by having such a person
issuing notifications without having any proper understanding what is legally appropriate. It
appeared to me that the witness is learning from me what his job is in legal terms. The lawyers
cannot even conduct appropriate litigation and should rather have trained this witness as to his
job function and legal provisions applicable to it! They are in my view wasting the courts time
with vexatious litigation!
Counsel for Buloke Shire Council in my view ought to have immediately raised with His Honour
Mullaly J that my ADDRESS TO THE COURT contained an OBJECTION TO
JURISDICTION and as such His Honour couldnt deal with any matter but the OBJECTION
TO JURISDICTION. In my view this concealment was a serious issue.
I as the Appellant had the carriage of the case but it appeared to me His Honour Mullaly J failed
to acknowledge this, and rather had the legal representative for Buloke Shire Council making his
statements, and by this well provided the platform to be deceived by Counsel. Time and time
again judges commented to opponent lawyers they should follow my example of the
ADDRESSS TO THE COURT as written submission, rather than appearing at the Bar table
often unprepared for their clients case. As well as it is fairer if the other party is unrepresented.
Here we had Counsel for Buloke Shire Council appearing and merely should have given me a
copy of his brief. That is if he had any in the first place. It is relevant that lawyers are counting
pages to claim cost but fail to read them and by this havent got a clue what the case is about.
This must stop! Judges must draw the line and make clear to Counsels that they better be
prepared and provide written submission and then at the hearing they can always provide some
supplement submissions but at least provide the opponent, in particular if unrepresented, a fairer
opportunity to what is pursued by a prosecutor.
p1
14-11-2015
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 2
During the hearing, His Honour Mullaly J after reading the ADDRESS TO THE COURT
raised with Counsel appearing for Buloke Shire Council as to the issue of the brief. Counsel then
responded that the request for the brief was received yesterday (Meaning Thursday 29
October 2015), and requested a week to provide the brief as there were photos. His Honour
then questioned why it would take a week. And I recall Counsel to state there was a public
holiday. His Honour then ordered that the brief was to be posted by no later than 9 November
2015, after is Honour requested me which mode of service I desired and I responded Australian
Post. It should be understood that as Buloke Shire Council legal representatives already attend to
the Magistrates Court of Victoria at St Arnaud on 20 August 2015 and 17 September 2015 a
(preliminary) brief ought to have then existed already. As such, upon my Tuesday 27 October
2013 request the legal representatives merely had to forward a copy to me. However, as I know
too well of about 4 decades appearing at the bar table, while I prepare my case with an
ADDRESS TO THE COURT, often, FAR TOO OFTEN, Counsels turn up not having a clue
what their clients case is about, and then start reading the case at court. This was what appeared
to be by Counsel representing Buloke Shire Council and by this he fabricated the yesterday
excuse. As author of books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and
other legal issues I publish my writings for my readers to be aware what is going on in the courts.
We will see if His Honour Mullaly J will condone or condemn so to say having been made a fool
by Counsel representing Buloke Shire Council! I consider perverting the course of justice to be a
very serious matter, as I view Counsel for Buloke Shire Council engaged in, and now let see if
His Honour Mullaly J has the same view. Obviously I wouldnt appreciate Buloke Shire Council
legal representatives to be so to say tipped off by you or by the court otherwise, to quickly
provide the documentation as I view this would amount to a conspiracy. I recall His Honour
Mullaly J commencing the proceedings as I understood his comment to be towards me that I was
a person who held the law apply to everyone else but myself. Actually I pursued no such thing. I
pursue that the rule of law applies to Buloke Shire Council and its legal representatives as much
as it does to me. That is what I am on about. Buloke Shire Council legal representatives could
have sent the brief by overnight mail that then forms a record as to when it was posted,
because a special identification number is provided for overnight mail. It should be understood
that to post the brief by 9 November 2015 didnt mean it couldnt be posted earlier, where it
required no more but to copy the existing brief that was on record, and as such one can only
assume Buloke Shire Council legal representatives may have deliberately waited till the end of
the period concluding on 9 November 2015 (10 calendar days) before intending to post the
brief, to me or simply couldnt care less at all and in the end omitted to do so, regardless as to
what was ordered by His Honour Mullaly J. Now being Saturday 14 November 2015 it must be
clear that without any postal deliveries in the weekend there obviously was a complete failure to
provide the brief as ordered.
In my view this is a deliberate conduct of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!
In May 1994 I appeared before His Honour Joske J and His Honour held that while I had served
documentation by registered post it didnt prove that the documents were in the envelope, as His Honour
commented I could have sent an empty envelope. And I couldnt prove the date the opponent party received
it. Hence despite that I had evidence to have forwarded mail via registered Post His Honour didnt accept
serve had been affected unless the opponent party would acknowledge this, and adjourned the matter. In my
view the Courts are bound to hold everyone equal before a court of law and hence should demand the same
from legal practitioners.

Hence, Buloke Shire Council, so its legal representatives must be held legally accountable to
have to prove that by no later than 9 November 2015 the brief was sent via Australian Post to
me and failing this the matter must be dealt with as a CONTEMPT OF COURT failing to
comply with the orders of His Honour Mullaly J. it would in my view imply bias if His Honour
Mullaly J so to say let Buloke Shire Council and its legal representatives of the hook, and I view
would undermine the integrity of the court.
p2
14-11-2015
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 3
.

Hansard 1-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

(Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention),
QUOTE Mr. OCONNER (New South Wales).Because, as has been said before, it is [start page 357] necessary not only that the administration of
justice should be pure and above suspicion, but that it should be beyond the possibility of suspicion;
END QUOTE

There are 2 issues I desire to raise in regard of this.

.

1/.

It is my view Counsel for Buloke Shire Council misled His Honour Mullaly J to claim
yesterday as the following quoted email copy proves that the request was made on
Tuesday 27 October 2015 and not at all on Thursday 29 October 2015.
I consider it a serious matter when an OFFICER OF THE COURT misled a judge as to
obtain benefits by this. I consider this to pervert the course of justice. Obviously I view
that His Honour Mullaly cannot accept this kind of gross deception having been
perpetrated upon the court, this as if this is one issue then what else is there being
deceived?

QUOTE 27-10-2015 correspondenced

Elliott Stafford and Associated
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
Cc:

27-10-2015

Mr Wayne Wall, Municipal Fire Prevention Officer buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au

Buloke Shire Council buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
Daniel Andrews Premier Victoria daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au & attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au
Ref; 20151027-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06-Re Buloke Shire Council cc LSC-COM-2015-0873-Re Appeal

Sir/Madam,
Hereby I urge you to clarify the position of Buloke Shire Council if it intends to oppose
my appeal, etc.
It should be understood that Buloke Shire Council acting within s114 of the Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution Act 1900 (UK) has the same obligations as the Public Prosecutor of the State of Victoria.
I received from a friend the following quote email, and well you may consider the content and provide me
with a preliminary brief or brief. After all I made known that Councillor Milne claimed not to know what
it was on about (the litigation) and as such the court may have to consider if you have any legal standing
(as I disputed this) to act for and on behalf of Buloke Shire Council considering that at least one
councillor didnt appear to be able to give informed consent to act for Buloke Shire Council. As such
others may likewise not be aware of what the litigation is about.
Obviously, I request not only for the brief/preliminary but also that Buloke Shire Council produces
records at least since 2009 as to how often it issued identical or nearly identical FIRE
PREVENTION NOTICES against landowners and how often any was against Buloke Shire Council
(Shire of Buloke).
END QUOTE 27-10-2015 correspondenced

His Honour may desire a member of the legal profession to talk rather than a self-represented
appellant, but well at least I pursue the truth which I view cannot be stated from Counsel for
Buloke Shire Council. And I cannot have that His Honour were to continue with this matter and
provide for more of the same.
Foster (1950) S.R. (N.S.W.) 149, at p151 (Lord Denning, speaking on the role of an advocate)
QUOTE
As an advocate he is a minister of Justice equally with a judge, A Barrister cannot pick or choose his
clients...He must accept the brief and do all he honourably can on behalf of his client. I say 'All he
honourably can' because his duty is not only to his client. He has a duty to the court which is
paramount. It is a mistake to suppose that he is a mouthpiece of his client to say what he wants: or
his tool to do what he directs. He is none of those things. He owes his allegiance to a higher cause. It is
the cause of truth and Justice. He must not consciously misstate the facts. He must not knowingly
p3
14-11-2015
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 4
conceal the truth. He must not unjustly make a charge of fraud, that is, without evidence to support
it. He must produce all relevant authorities, even those that are against him. He must see that his client
discloses, if ordered, all relevant documents, even those that are fatal to his case. He must disregard the
specific instructions of his client, if they conflict with his duty to the court.
END QUOTE

It is clear from what eventuated in court that His Honour Mullaly J had concerns that the brief
had not been provided but seemed to be swayed by the claim by Counsel for Buloke Shire
Council that the request was made yesterday.
I may add the following clarification:
I represented Mr Harold James Johnson on 4 occasions, in the matter of Legal Service Commissioner v
Harold James Johnson. At one point Counsel representing the Legal Service commission raised with His
Honour Smithers J that I had made a statement that was factually incorrect but as I had used the wording It
is my understanding then I had convened my understanding and in fact Mr Harold James Johnson QC was
known to have made previously a factual incorrect claim. As such it was not held against me personally that
Counsel clarified the factual error. This because I had used the wording It is my understanding.

As I recall it Counsel for Buloke Shire Council didnt use the term In my understanding and
therefore made a claim as to which was factually incorrect.
It should be obvious that Counsel for Buloke Shire Council could have consulted his paperwork but
didnt do so. In my view His Honour Mullaly was entitled to accept the submission from Counsel
for Buloke Shire Council that my request for the brief was made yesterday but now that it is
revealed that in fact Counsel for Buloke Shire Council misled His Honour Mullaly J then I view
serious legal implications ought to result from this.
If His Honour Mullaly J fails to deal with this matter appropriately then I view His Honour may be
deemed to be bias towards the legal profession to allow it to so to say run the court as it desires,
etc. I am known as the policeman against lawyers in that I expose lawyers misusing their
position at the bar table to make fraudulent statements. As such Counsel for Buloke Shire Council
so to say picked the wrong cased to perpetrate this upon His Honour Mullaly J and I expect no less
than that His Honour Mullaly J will deal with this in an appropriate manner.
2/.

As indicated under point 1/., His Honour Mullaly J ordered that by 9 November 2015 the brief
was to be posted to me, and I had accepted this via Australia Post. As by today I have still not
received any brief. I will now use an example:
On 9 October 1994 I was at my (then) residence in Berriwillock, when matters were before His
Honour Guest J with the other party and legal representatives attending in court. Again I conducted
matters via telephone. When opponent Counsel commenced to refer to documentation I objected that
the documents had not been served despite an order of the court in August 1994 that the documents
had to be served within 48 hours. His Honour in the end accepted that no service had been executed
and as per my submission struck out the application of the opponent party and ordered it needed leave
to file to institute any further application.

In this matter of appeal; obviously there can be no issue of the appeal to be dismissed as I am the
Appellant but the Court can hold that by the deception perpetrated by Counsel for Buloke Shire
Council and failing to provide the brief as was ordered (As the court ought to consider Australian
Post ordinary delivers overnight and in any event Buloke Shire Council legal representatives
could have sent documentation by overnight mail) then the appeal must be deemed unopposed.

The Court must stop giving special allowances for legal representatives and must enforce the rule
of law equally as it does against anyone else. Indeed, it is because of this rot of special
allowances for the legal profession that the integrity of the courts so to say has been smashes to
smithereens.
I may add, that while Counsel for Buloke Shire Council submitted (on 30 October 2015) that its
witness would take a mere 5 minutes, in my view this may in fact take perhaps hours. This, as I
have discovered that the witnesses seemed to lack any proper knowledge as to the legal issues
concerning his duties and obligations. While as a Professional Advocate I have the protection
and immunity as a solicitor representing a party before the Supreme Court of Victoria, however I
am not an OFFICER OF THE COURT, and free communicate with opponent witnesses. In
particular where such potential witness request me for a face to face meeting, as eventuated.
p4
14-11-2015
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 5
While I never had any doubt that on legal basis I would defeat Buloke Shire Council,
nevertheless this is not so to say a free get out of jail card for Buloke Shire Council legal
representatives to misuse and abuse their positions as OFFICERS OF THE COURT to make
fraudulent/false/misleading submissions/statements. I understand that in the case of MORIATY v
LONDON, CHATMAM & DOVER RY Queens Bench 1870 L.R. 5 Q.B. 314;39 L.T.Q.B.
109;22 L.T. 163;34 J.P. 692;18 W.R. 625 by the plaintiff conduct to suborn false evidence
this was seen by the Court that this conduct amounted to an admission that he had no case.

Our courts are far too important to serve anyone out of the ordinary and no judge can permit to
be ridiculed in being so to say taken by the nose to provide orders which otherwise would not
likely have been made. While I am aware that Buloke Shire Council legal representatives may
when becoming aware of my complaint desire to have some sort of delivery arranged, this
however cannot overcome that as I understand it they failed to comply with the orders they
obtained by deception. As His Honour Guest J made clear that where I had to comply with the
rules of the court then likewise His Honour had no alternative but to enforce the rules and so any
orders to the opponent party. I look forwards to a positive response that His Honour Mullaly
J will address the matter appropriately.
While there is a lot more to the case, I view however that those issues are not relevant to the
matters referred to above and I will for this not refer to them, safe to say that in my view Counsel
for Buloke Shire Council should have alerted His Honour Mullaly J on 30 November 2015 that I
objected to the jurisdiction of the court in my ADDRESS TO THE COURT. It may be extra
ordinary for an Appellant to object to the jurisdiction of the Court to hear and determine the
appeal, but as I did set out to His Honour Peter Kidd CJ it was appropriate to do so, considering
the legal technicalities I refer to. This as the Court on find that the County Court of Victoria
cannot invoke jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter De Novo, because the orders
appealed against never were made by a Magistrates Court of Victoria having invoked
jurisdiction, as it omitted to deal with the OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION then before the
court, then the appeal succeeds in that part.(Wakim HCA 27 of 1999).
I request that I am provided without charge a copy of the 30 October 2015 transcript, as I
all along objected to the jurisdiction of the court, and shouldnt be out of pocket to pursue
JUSTICE. I may state that when I on 19 March 2009 represented Mr Francis James Colosimo
before Her Honour Harbison J I was then provided without charge 6 (printed out) transcripts
(including of 5 previous hearings when Mr Colosimo was represented by counsel, and
established from this that at no time Mr Francis James Colosimo had been formally charged.). I
may add that on 9 November 2015 in unrelated litigation the County Court of Victoria sitting in
Ballarat ordered as I understand it without cost to Mr Colosimo to be provided with a copy of the
court recording. As such the court can provide court recordings/transcripts free of charge. In the
circumstances both the court recording and the printed transcript should be provided to me of the
30 November 2015 hearing free of charge. Considering I did OBJECT TO THE
JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS (Before any litigation was commenced, and so prewarned about it and since maintained the same.) I should not be out of pocket in that regard also.
And as a senior citizen should be incurring ongoing expenses to obtain transcripts/court
recordings where I opposed in the first place the jurisdiction of the courts.
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all
issues/details.
Awaiting your response,

G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(Our name is our motto!)
p5
14-11-2015
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also
Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati