Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 20

Page 1

Associate Sarah Gall to His Honour Carmody J


judgecarmody.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Cc:

18-5-2016

Mr Peter Kidd CJ County Court of Victoria, feedback@countycourt.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
Elliott Stafford and Associated
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
County Court of Victoria crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au
The Registrar , registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Mr Garry McIntosh, Associate to His Honour Mullaly J. judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au


Re: 20160518-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Associate Sarah Gall to His Honour Carmody J CCV-Re APPEAL-15-2502-Re transcript, etc

Madam,

hereby I request to be provided free of charge with a copy of the transcript/audio


recording of the hearing held on 17 May 2016 at the County Court of Victoria at Ballarat venue.
With the problems of my hearing aids, despite having them on the loop system of the court, and
not properly understanding what the barrister appearing for Buloke Shire Council stated as well
as that I was unable to hear at times what His Honour stated, and in fact repeated in the best
possibly way His Honour could, and in the end I responded I didnt know about the word, this as
I in fact still couldnt elicit what His Honour was stating, I hold it better to check the
recording/transcript so that I may possibly get a better perception of it all.
For your information the hearing aids I am given the understanding usually allows only to hear
something in a range of about 3 metres. When putting it on the loop it can prevent hearing other
sounds. Because the new version was issued to me on 12 May 2016 and the hearing was on 17
May 2016 it resulted that there was no way I could properly get adjusted to them. Often it takes
weeks and adjustments needs to be made at times. In this case over a period of some 6 months no
real progress was made. Which may underline the problems with them.
It also underlines why I prefer to submit in writing my written submission in the ADDRESS TO
THE COURT so that I can avoid as much as possible any problems.
It appeared to me that His Honour may have been concerned as to my criticism upon the legal
processes and in that also as to Buloke Shire Council legal representatives and so I will enclose
below an email I sent out about my views about the hearing, and well the court may then
consider it my writings is unreasonable or not.
Unlike the members of the legal profession who flaunt the legal system I am not seeking to do
so. As my ADDRESS TO THE COURT Supplement 1 (17-5-2016) makes clear the court is not a
cloister virtue.
I received yet another notification from the Attorney-General
QUOTE

Re: see attachment 20160517-SchorelHlavka O.W.B. to Assoc to His Honour


p1
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 2

Hannan J CCV-Re APPEAL-15-2502-Who


is the opponent party really
From

attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au

To

admin@inspector-rikati.com

Date

Today 02:49 (17-5-2016)

Good Morning
We would like to confirm that we have received your email addressed to the AttorneyGeneral, Hon Martin Pakula MP.
Your correspondence is currently being considered.
Kind Regards
Office of the Hon Martin Pakula MP
Attorney-General and Minister for Racing
Level 26, 121 Exhibition Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
PH: 03 8684 1111 E: attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
The content of this e-mail and any attachments may be private and confidential, intended only for use
of the individual or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not
read, forward, print, copy, disclose, use or store in any way the information this e-mail or any
attachment contains.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy all
copies of this e-mail and any attachments.
Our organisation respects the privacy of individuals. For a copy of our privacy policy please go to our
website or contact us.

END QUOTE

It appears to me that because there is a federal election this kind of response to me merely means
to not seek to indicate to ignore writings when in reality it is but just look better for the sake of
harnessing votes to pretend to care. Still I view I make all aware of it.
The email below is merely a limited response as to set out issues, and is not and must not be held
to refer to all matters in issue. Again, I view the communication is one reasonable in the
circumstances but then again every person may perceive what is written differently.
QUOTE 18-5-2016 EMAIL

Re: Monday 10.00 am 30 May 2016 at Melbourne County Court of


Victoria
People

Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au>


Today at 16:01 (18-5-2016)

To
p2
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 3

Jim

Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

CC

Jim,
from the start His Honour made known that he had read all my writings. In fact he held up the
huge pile of my documentation.
Therefore, and during the discussion she seemed to understand what I was on about. He also
seemed to be well aware that as a CONSTITUTIONALIST I pursue the true meaning and
application of the constitution. He did however make clear that it was not his position to rectify
the ills in the court system. I placed before him my submissions that basically the lawyers were
using the court as a puppet-on-a-string, etc, and acting in CONTEMPT OF COURT by failing to
comply with the orders of His Honour Mullaly J of 30 October 2016 counsel for Buloke Shire
Council virtually said nothing. I was the one basically having a debate with him.
At one stage His Honour raised the issue why I contacted the attorney-General when there is a
separation of powers, and well I then zeroed into that, and stated that I had precisely expected
this and the Letters Patent published on 2 January 1901 in the Victorian Gazette also required not
only a separation of powers but also an "impartial administration of justice". Etc.
In the end I stated to His Honour that while I didn't agree with his decisions in the end he is the
judge and make the decision.
do understand that I placed a solid case before the court but in the end His Honour will have to
set out in his reason of judgment why His Honour without any evidence from Buloke Shire
Council and/or its legal representatives to explain why they failed repeatedly to comply with the
rules and regulations and with the order of His Honour Mullaly Jas well as failing to follow
proper legal procedures to apply for "leave" His Honour nevertheless upon the evidence or the
lack thereof nevertheless made his rulings.
As such, I did place the case before His Honour and it is now for His Honour to provide the
appropriate explanation to the general community as to why His Honour made the decisions as
he did.

QUOTE In the Marriage of Tennant (1980) 5 FLR 777 at 780

As no grounds for appeal are required to be specified in the notice of Appeal, which, on filing institutes the
appeal (reg 122), there is no limitations of the scope of the appeal and all findings of fact and law made in the
lower court in relation to the decree appealed are in challenge and cannot be relied on by the appellant or the
respondent. All the issues (unless by consent) must be reheard. This of course brings me to the point of the
absence of reason for the magistrates decision in this case. Perhaps reasons were given orally but not recorded
for the record. Apart from the requirement of such reason for the purpose of the appeal process, there is the
basic ground of criticism that litigants who go to court, put their witnesses up, argue their case and attempt to
controvert the opposing case are entitled to know, if they lose, why they lost. If they are given no reason they
p3
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 4
may be entitled to feel the decision against them was conceived in prejudice, bias, or caprice. In such a case
not only the litigant, but justice itself, is the loser.

Magistrates should realise, even more than they seem to do, that this class of business is not mere ordinary
trivial work, and they should deal with these cases with a due sense of responsibility which administrations of
the summary jurisdiction Act and the far reaching consequences of the orders that they make thereafter entail.
[Baker v Baker (1906) 95 LT 549; In Robinson v Robinson (1898) p135; and again in Cobb v Cobb (1900)
p145] it was stated that when making orders of this kind, from which lies an appeal to other courts, it is the duty
of the magistrate not only to cause a note to be made of the evidence, and of his decision, but to give the reasons
for his decision and to cause a note to be made of his reasons... Elaborate judgements are not required, but the
reasons which lead the magistrate to make his order must be explicitly stated.

END QUOTE

As such the general community including my readers/followers who in the end will have to
consider if they hold His Honour did or did not consider impartially the material before the court
or that they hold His Honour must deemed not to have been impartial.
In my view there was so to say no ill feelings that I could detect by His Honour towards me, and
I view that more than likely many unrepresented parties may benefit from his kind of conducting
a hearing but ultimately if this is right or wrong in the eyes of the general community is for the
general community to decide.
While His honour referred to the Court services, I am well aware that it is a sheer waste of time
to contact them as in fact the same proved to be with the Chief Justice and others.
His Honour indicated I ought to have reported the failure to comply to the judge concerned. I
pointed out that in fact I did so to his Associate Mr Gary McIntosh and raised the fact that a
special hearing ought to be held but nothing came from it.
While I had gone to bed the previous night before 11pm (whereas usually I go to bed generally
after 2am) in the end I only slept about 2 hours and then being awake went back onto the
computer. I left Viewbank at about 7am but somehow ended up arriving at the court about 10
minutes before 10. Just in time. I was exhausted and my leg was hurting but still I tried to stand
as long as possible, albeit in the end raised the leg problem and His Honour had no issue with me
then remaining seated.
I was however having ongoing problems with hearing what His Honour was stating, and this
despite that His Honour was repeating the same several times when I indicated I had a problem
hearing His Honour. I had explained that the hearing aids were issued days earlier and well didn't
work properly. I had them set for the loop service of the court but at times His Honour's voice
fainted away despite speaking into the microphone. Then at the end I started to loose my
p4
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 5
bearings as I started (due to exhaustion) even lose the name of the Country Fire Authority Act
1958 this even so I had earlier repeatedly referred to it.

A judge having to be impartial must therefore restrict himself to handing down a judgment and
orders based upon what was before the court. A judge has no function to argue the case of one or
the other party, as this would rob him of being impartial.
Therefore, while the hearing was so to say amicable and friendly, and I do view that this might
be very beneficially to many an unrepresented accused/defendant if this is His Honour's ordinary
modus operandi to conduct a hearing, it doesn't mean that the end result could be legally proper
if His Honour substituted evidence or the lack of evidence or disregard proper legal consideration
in His Honour's reason of judgment. This is why a court needs to provide a "reason of judgment"
which then states why His Honour came upon considering all relevant facts, including any
evidence, if any, from the party that failed to comply with rules/regulations/court orders the
Court made its decision.
Ample of appellated decisions exist that where a party has the benefits of a court order then it is
for the party acting in violation of the court orders, of failing to act to shows to the court why it
must be excused doing so.
I may add that His Honour held that writing to a lawyer of Buloke Shire Council was deemed to
recognise them representing Buloke Shire Council, where I raised the issue that they had failed
to file a Notice of appearance when required and that I had specifically stated in my 27
November 2015 and my 16 May 2016 correspondence not to accept service and neither accept
them to represent Buloke Shire Council as such. when my step-daughter became a lawyer more
than 30 years ago she discovered to her horror that then she couldn't become a legal practitioner
(having first to do her Articles) because her parent had naturalised and believing she was also,
whereas the government had omitted to include her. That therefore prevented her at that time to
become then at that time a legal practitioner. (There was a case before the supreme Court of
Victoria where a South African national "M" didn't want to pledge an oath to the Crown but had
republican views. He was denied to become a Legal Practitioner.)Actually the Pochi case that
was before the High Court of Australia and numerous others showed that children only babies at
arrival in Australia were then not naturalised when their parents were naturalised, where the
parents believed the children were included but the government didn't bother to include them but
didn't explain that to the parents that the children were not automatically included.
Some were deported after committing crimes on the bases they were and remained aliens, despite
having been here since having been a baby.
His Honour also held the view that one cannot to the jurisdiction of the court with an
OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION against once own appeal as this inherently give jurisdiction. I
different from this view and explained why but in the end His Honour indicated that he kept top
that position. His Honour raised that it was not in the legal provisions that an appeal could be
subject to an OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION but I pointed out so many other issues were not
but that I clearly had set it all out in my writings.
While His Honour stated he read all the material it was a surprise to me that His Honour didn't
seem to be aware of my writings to Mr Gary McIntosh regarding the breaches and the special
hearing required. Then again His Honour may have overlooked this or just forgotten about it.

p5
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 6
Mr Wayne Wall didn't turn up and neither had the lawyers of Buloke Shire Council notified me
about this. Ordinary this is required as in effect they caused the case not being able to be
completed. But that just shows/underlines the appalling conduct by the lawyers, how they are
disorganised and disregarding proper procedures.

While it seems to me that in a sense His Honour enjoyed the fact that I was holding the lawyers
account to their ongoing mismanagement of the case in the end unless His Honour does hold
them accountable it indeed may in that regard have been a sheer waste of time for me to expose it
all. it doesn't mean our constitution fails just that we do not have a proper legal system operating
in accordance to the true meaning and application of the constitution. Ironically I may have
achieved to expose our legal system simply is beyond repair, this as my writings to others also
seems to be some responses but no action whatsoever as to actually fix the darn problems.
Because the hearing is so to say in progress His Honour can still reverse his decisions and
acknowledge that the onus was upon Buloke Shire Council to prove why the court should accept
it still had a legal standing where it failed time and time again to comply with the
rules/regulations and other legal; provisions and failed to comply with the orders of His Honour
Mullaly J of 30 October 2015 despite even being reminded by me upon this (even so this is not
my duty or obligation) and despite not having even bothered to apply for "leave to file/serve out
of time" as after all without such application I view the court has no power to grand something
not applied for by Buloke Shire Council. Likewise, I view that despite His Honour's ruling I
maintain my view that the defect of the Fire Prevention Notice was fatal to any legal standing by
Buloke Shire Council.
Personally, I have lost any confidence in the legal system because where I so much exposed the
wrongdoings of Buloke Shire Council and they conduct themselves in violation to the
rules/regulations/legal provisions and even court orders and do not bother even to give me proper
advance notification about a witness not going to be available and so I am in that regard wasting
my time to prepare for the case, and so far the court has done absolutely nothing to hold them
legally accountable for this, then what kind of legal system do we have, I wonder?
It is not that I have failed, rather that the court would have failed if it cannot set out in a reason of
judgment the legal justification for its decisions. The general community is entitled that a court
makes decision suiting the general community, and not that the court fails to explain itself.
.
Again, in law until the orders are drafted and issued the court can still alter them where it
considers they are legally incorrect, and as such His Honour can still reverse his decisions to
reflect that the failure by Buloke Shire Council was inexplicable and not showing any legal
jurisdiction and therefore my submission opposing their legal standing had to be upheld after all.
.
Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28 (28 April 1998)
Dawson J pointed out in Hunter Resources Ltd v Melville when discussing the
statutory provision in that case: "substantial compliance with the relevant
statutory requirement was not possible. Either there was compliance or there
was not."
His Honour held that this is an issue for litigation during the Appeal hearing, whereas I held that
if the notice was defective/invalid then everything flowing from it is defective. Hence no legal
standing.
p6
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 7
It would be absurd, in my view, to go through a litigation process and then in the end the court to
conclude that indeed the notice was invalid and so everything flowing from it is invalid. It was
my very intention to address this issue from onset to avoid a possible drawn out hearing.
.
There was nothing to indicate to me that His Honour somehow had ill intentions towards me, just
that His Honour seemed to reason upon a different perception then I was. His Honour is entitled
to adjudicate to what His Honour deems appropriate, even if this means making errors in law.
At no time was the objection to jurisdiction and objection to legal standing somehow to
thwartbeing held legally accountable for any legal wriongdoing, this as even without that I have
absolutely no doubt that I should succeed in the appeal itself. However it cast a grave doubt that
if the court makes decisions not based upon facts but what the court itself rightly or wrongly may
have as views irrespective of the evidence, or the lack thereof, then no matter how much I will
present a possible 100% solid Appeal case (if there is such possibility that is) I could still so to
say look down the barrel of defeat because the court fails to consider the real facts, etc, of the
case.

I have seen too often the despair by people having lost a case where they held they should have
succeeded but the court for some reason or another introduced its own kind of evidence to aid a
party, albeit in its judgment, to prevent the party adversely affected to the decision to be able to
respond.
If I after all this elaborate research and still find to have the court making decisions which I view
are legally wrong then in the end the general community may have to consider what it view is
about what would have been appropriate.
I have been long enough appearing at the bar table to know that judicial officers make decisions
that never could have been contemplated in view of the amount of evidence before the court.
In my view it is clear that where Buloke Shire Council knew that Mr Wayne Wall (witness) was
not going to be attending to the hearing then the lawyers could have requested to have the case
transferred to Melbourne. They didnt, and as such I view they manipulated the system to every
possible manner to unduly act extremely difficult.
While His Honour, to his credit, ordered the hearing of the appeal now to be conducted in
Melbourne, it may just show how unreasonable Buloke Shire Council acted in the overall.
They could have requested the court to have the hearing transferred to the Melbourne venue
knowing that Mr Wayne Wall was not going to attend, but they didnt and neither bothered to
inform me of this.
https://elo.legalaid.qld.gov.au/webdocs/dbtextdocs/internal/irregseries/cle/1997/s222just.pdf
QUOTE
(ii) To apply for leave to serve out of time
- must demonstrate no fault of appellant, e.g., by affidavit from
appellant and any other person who may assist
- may have to demonstrate prospects of success; this may
require material which discloses what evidence was given, what
submissions were made, the decision and reasons, and the basis
on which the result is aid to be appealable.
END QUOTE
https://www.courtsni.gov.uk/enGB/Judicial%20Decisions/PublishedByYear/Documents/2001/2001%20NIQB%2024/j_j_HIGC
3453.htm
QUOTE
p7
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 8
Thus a defendant is obliged to serve a notice to defend in Form 42 within 21 days from service of
the Civil Bill. Service of a notice to defend outside the 21 day period is only permitted with the
consent in writing of the other party or with the leave of the court. No consent was sought nor
was any application made for leave to serve out of time.
END QUOTE

And
https://www.courtsni.gov.uk/enGB/Judicial%20Decisions/PublishedByYear/Documents/2001/2001%20NIQB%2024/j_j_HIGC
3453.htm
QUOTE
Counsel on behalf of the plaintiff submitted that what the defendant proposed was an abuse of
process. No intention to defend has been lodged, yet the defendant proposes to defend the
proceedings in the High Court on appeal. It was accepted that the defendant had a right to appeal
preserved by statute, but that appeal was limited to the proceedings on 1 October 1999, related to
the assessment of damages. The defendant could have appealed the default judgment and is now
out of time or could have sought to set it aside. He has done none of those things.
The Notice of Intention to Defend is an important part of the Civil Bill process in the
County Court. Service of the Notice determines the nature of the proceedings whether defended
or undefended. It informs the Chief Clerk when and before whom the case should be listed.
Thus Order 8 Rule 2 requires a defendant who intends to defend to serve Notice on the other
party or parties within 21 days. A decision not to serve a Notice of Intention to Defend or failure
to do so, informs the court that the case is undefended. However, Order 8 Rule 2(2) provides a
saving clause where, for good reason, no notice to defend has been served within the requisite
time period. The parties can consent to late service or the court may grant leave. The court
could refuse leave, in which situation the case remains undefended. There is no reason why a
refusal of leave could not be appealed. The word decree in Article 60 of the County Court
Order means no more than an order of that court.
The instant case when it appeared in the list of the District Judge on 1 October 1999 was
an undefended matter in which the courts function was to assess damages, which it did. The
decree or order of the court on that day was an assessment of damages in a case in which
interlocutory judgment had already been entered. The defendant appeals against that order and
submits that he has a right to a hearing on the merits in the appellate court. However the case
still remains an undefended case, as no notice of intention to defend has been lodged and as an
undefended case the only issue which can be the subject of appeal is the assessment of damages.
No appeal has been lodged against the interlocutory judgment. Can an appeal against an
assessment of damages, where interlocutory judgment is entered, convert an undefended case
into a defended case? I do not think it can. An appeal from the County Court to the High Court
may be a rehearing, but it is a rehearing of what was litigated in the court below. It does not
seem to me that a defendant can fail to observe the rules in the County Court and expect the High
Court to ignore his failure and treat an undefended case as a defended case. This would ignore
the purpose of the rules.
In Davis v NI Carriers [199] NI 19 Lowry LCJ (as he then was) said at page 20:
Where a time-limit is imposed by statute it cannot be extended
unless that or another statute contains a dispensing power. Where
the time is imposed by rules of court which embody a dispensing
power, such as that found in Order 64, rule 7, the court must
exercise its discretion in each case, and for that purpose the
relevant principles are:
p8
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 9
(1)
whether the time is sped: a court will, where the
reason is a good one, look more favourably on an
application made before the time is up;

(2)
when the time-limit has expired, the extent to which
the party applying is in default;
(3)
the effect on the opposite party of granting the
application and, in particular, whether he can be
compensated by costs;
(4)
whether a hearing on the merits has taken place or
would be denied by refusing an extension;
(5)
whether there is a point of substance (which in
effect means a legal point of substance when dealing with
cases stated) to be made which could not otherwise be put
forward; and
(6)
whether the point is of general, and not merely
particular significance.
To these I add the important principle:
(7)

that the rules of court are there to be observed.

In this connection I could not hope to improve on what Lord Guest


has said in Ratnam v. Cumarasamy [1965] 1 W.L.R. 8, 12:
The rules of court must prima facie be obeyed,
and in order to justify a court in extending the
time during which some step in procedure
requires to be taken there must be some material
upon which the court can exercise its discretion.
If the law were otherwise, a party in breach
would have an unqualified right to an extension
of time which would defeat the purpose of the
rules, which is to provide a time table for the
conduct of litigation.
The importance of the rules and compliance with them cannot be overlooked. Various savings
are provided by the County Court Rules where for good reason, the Rules have not been
complied with. The issue of liability has never been litigated in the County Court. The purpose
of an appeal is to allow a party, dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, to appeal
against the decision of the lower court. The County Court has not determined the merits of the
liability issue other than to enter judgment by default. It cannot be good law for the question of
liability to be litigated for the first time in the appellate court. Therefore my ruling is that the
only issue on appeal is the assessment of damages.
END QUOTE

p9
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 10
I am not prepared to litigate until I die this issue, as I view I have a right to the proper
enforcement of the rules/regulations and other legal provisions and the fact that Buloke Shire
Council didn't apply for any "leave" then a judge of the court cannot ignore this. The appeal was
undefended and the onus is upon the court to enforce its own rules/regulations and other legal
provisions.
It is indeed a mockery to the orders of His Honour Mullaly J that the orders stipulated serves via
Australia Post by or on 9 November 2015 and this didnt eventuate within the time so ordered. In
my view His Honour has no position to hold that email on 25 November 29015 was to be
accepted as service where in fact on 30 October 2015 I was asked by His Honour Mullaly J the
type of service I required and when I indicated via Australia Post and this was not objected to by
counsel appearing for Buloke Shire Council then it was a right which couldnt be interfered with.
If however lawyers can disregard orders of the court willy nilly then why bother about court
orders? In my view the only way His Honour could have dealt with the matter on 17 May 2016
was if Buloke Shire Council had applied to the Court leave to serve out of time and that the
court would vary the terms of the orders accordingly and provide for service via email.
No such applications were made by Buloke Shire Council and as such it was an
UNDEFENDEND appeal right and I view my submission that Buloke Shire council had no legal
standing to attend to the hearing on 17 May 2016 was the correct way to deal with matters.

There is a lot more to it but the above stated should give you some indication that it seems to me
that in the end lawyers can manipulate the system, ignore rules/regulations and other legal
provisions and court orders and still are not held legally accountable for this. It so to say makes a
mockery of numerous authorities
What so far is shown is that from onset there has been a total disregard to following proper legal
provisions both as to the filing of the summons for hearing in the Magistrates Court of Victoria at
St Arnaud and a litany of other issues of breaches of rules/regulations/other legal provisions and
court order. Even a disregard to advise me about the witness of Buloke Shire Council not to turn
up for the hearing.
How then can I expect any better from the court in future proceedings where I am basically
waiting my time to prepare for an appeal where so to say the goal post will be changed during the
game as to suit the other party.
It may be stated that I was at the court at 10am and with an appeal this is part of bail conditions. I
waited until the court called me for the case that I formally requested the court to adjourn so I
could use the toilet facilities and sort out my paperwork at the bar table. This I view was in the
circumstances the proper manner to deal with the bail conditions. If I had walked out to visit
toilet facilities it could be technically deemed to be in violation of the bail conditions. Likewise I
advised the court as to Mr Colosimo being in the court room where he might be a witness. As
such Mr Colosimo was then requested to leave the court room. It is afterwards unfair he had to
do so where counsel for Buloke Shire Council knew that Mr Wayne Wall was not going to turn
up for the appeal hearing. No decency even art commencement of proceedings to immediately
advise me that Mr Wayne Wall would not be attending as a witness.
As for the adjournment I requested to the credit of His Honour that was granted.
While I do not agree with the decisions of His Honour I recognize that rightly or wrongly His
Honour has the right to make decisions as His Honour deemed fit and proper and still can amend
these orders until they are finalized in drafting and sealed by the court.

p10
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 11
Obviously I am left with what on earth do I prepare an Appeal for if the goal post are going to be
changed during proceedings that no matter my submissions and any supporting evidence I will
get nowhere.
In my view the nonappearance of the witness Mr Wayne wall should have been explored, due to
the hearing problems I never understood anything what was stated about it other than something
His Honour stated about :out of jurisdiction.
In my view, the litigation was caused by Mr Wayne Wall and hence Buloke Shire Council should
have avoided any possible classes with any court dates. Where the hearing was notified on 2 May
2016 b y the court then I view ample of time existed for Buloke Shire Council, so its legal
representatives to contact me if I consented to have the hearing date vacated due to any travel of
Mr Wayne Wall.
True, I had indicated hearing problems to the Ballarat registry with my hearing aids (still not
fixed) but they never to my knowledge came back to me that the hearing date was being changed

QUOTE
Appeal
From

registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Sender

Melinda.Hampshire@courts.vic.gov.au

To

admin@inspector-rikati.com

Date

2016-02-18 00:50

Good Morning
Please note the Ballarat County Court is located at 100 Grenville St Sth Ballarat Vic 3350, the postal
address is PO Box 604 Ballarat Vic 3350.
Regards
Mel
Registrar
Ballarat County Court
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
The content of this e-mail and any attachments may be private and confidential, intended only for use of the
individual or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not read, forward,
print, copy, disclose, use or store in any way the information this e-mail or any attachment contains.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy all copies of
this e-mail and any attachments.
Our organisation respects the privacy of individuals. For a copy of our privacy policy please go to our website
or contact us.

END QUOTE
QUOTE
Attn: Ballarat County Court registry - re
Buloke Shire Council ats Schorel-Hlavka AP-15-2502
From

Alison May

To

crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Cc

admin@inspector-rikati.com

Date

2016-02-19 07:14

, Basil Stafford

Dear Sirs,

p11
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 12
We act on behalf of the Buloke Shire Council in the above matter.
Further to my recent telephone conversation with Emily of the Magistrates' Court
registry at Ballarat we confirm that the parties were under the impression that the
above matter was listed for hearing at Ballarat on Monday 22 February 2016.
We confirm the advice of Emily after consultation with Jordan, formerly of the County
Court registry, that the matter is in fact not listed for hearing on Monday but rather
will be listed in the circuit which commences on Monday.
The purpose of this email is to confirm that the parties will not appear on Monday and
ask that the registry contact the writer at your earliest convenience to discuss the
listing of this matter.
Yours faithfully,
Alison May
Legal Practitioner
Elliott Stafford & Associates
316A Queens Parade, Clifton Hill 3068
Tel. 03 9486 7555
Fax. 03 9486 6444
Sent from my iPhone

END QUOTE
As such the court to my knowledge didnt have the decency to notify me that the matter wouldnt
be heard on 22 February 2016 but I relied upon Alison Mays email the hearing wouldnt
proceed.
The last email I had from the court itself was:
QUOTE
Re: Appeal
From

registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Sender

Melinda.Hampshire@courts.vic.gov.au

To

admin@inspector-rikati.com

Date

2016-02-18 23:31

Dear Sir
All your correspondence has been placed on the Court file.
There is parking available across the road in the supermarket. I believe the roof top parking above
safeway is all day.
Regards

"Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B."


<admin@inspector-rikati.com>

To registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au,
cc

18/02/2016 11:13 AM

SubjectRe: Appeal

Please respond to
admin@inspector-rikati.com

p12
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 13

Mel, Registrar,

Thank you for providing the detasils of the Ballarat venue location.
.
Can you p;rovide details as to parking facilitiesavailable for those attending
to the court?
.
Also, can you make sure that the written submissions in the ADDRESS TO
THE COURT dated 1-2-2016, 14-2-2016 and 17-2-2016 will be on court file?

I intend to bring printed out copies along also.

In view that I continue to challenge the jurisdiction of the court by my


OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION ist is essential that the judge is aware of this
and that any appearance by me wiis not intended and must not be perceived
that I in any way relignuish my objection.
Later today I will be attending to my doctor to find out if the x-ray indicate
an urgent leg operation (as occurred twice before) and as such my
appearance will be depending upon what the doctor may hold having to be
done. Where possible I will notify the court as soon as possible if there is
any problem to appear.

Just in case you do not have already the ADDRESS TO THE COURT on file I
attach them hereby again.
As I explained to His Honour Mullaly J on 30 October 2015 that once a
judge refused to consider the content of the ADDRESS TO THE COURT and
on appeal the Full court set aside the orders on the basis His Honour made
an error in law not to consider my written submissions.
Thanks

p13
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 14

--Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.


MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL
107 Graham Road
Viewbank 3084, Victoria, Australia
Author of INSPECTOR-RIKATI books on certain constitutional and other
legal issues.
THE MORAL OF A SOCIETY CAN BE MEASURED BY HOW IT PROVIDES
FOR THE DISABLED
On 2016-02-18 00:50, registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au wrote:
Good Morning
Please note the Ballarat County Court is located at 100 Grenville St Sth Ballarat Vic 3350,
the postal address is PO Box 604 Ballarat Vic 3350.
Regards
Mel
Registrar
Ballarat County Court

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL


The content of this e-mail and any attachments may be private and
confidential, intended only for use of the individual or entity named. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message you must not read, forward,
print, copy, disclose, use or store in any way the information this e-mail or
any attachment contains.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately
and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments.
Our organisation respects the privacy of individuals. For a copy of our
privacy policy please go to our website or contact us.[attachment
"20160201-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Buloke
Shire Council -APPEAL-15-2502-ADDRESS TO THE COURT.pdf" deleted by
Melinda Hampshire/Person/DOJ] [attachment "20160214-Schorel-Hlavka
O.W.B. to Assoc Mr Garry McIntosh to His Honour Mullaly J CCV-Re APPEAL15-2502-Re ADDRESS TO THE COURT Supplement 1-Re 22-2-2016
hearing.pdf" deleted by Melinda Hampshire/Person/DOJ] [attachment
p14
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 15

"20160217-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Assoc Mr Garry McIntosh to His Honour


Mullaly J CCV-Re APPEAL-15-2502-Re ADDRESS TO THE COURT Supplement
1-Re 22-2-2016 hearing.pdf" deleted by Melinda Hampshire/Person/DOJ]
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
The content of this e-mail and any attachments may be private and confidential, intended only for use of the
individual or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not read, forward,
print, copy, disclose, use or store in any way the information this e-mail or any attachment contains.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy all copies of
this e-mail and any attachments.
Our organisation

END QUOTE
As such the statement There is parking available across the road in the supermarket. I believe the roof
top parking above safeway is all day. Doesn;t indicate the hearing was not to proc eed on 22 Feb
ruary 2016.
It was therefore of concern that during the hearing before His Honour on 17 May 2016 Counsel
for Buloke Shire Council produced a correspondence purportedly confirming oral
communication between Ballarat Registry and Alison May (legal practitioner for Buloke Shire
Council) that on my application the hearing was not proceeding. As I commented to His
Hopnour this ought to have been in writing with a copy to myself as the other party.
As such, it appears to me that buloke Shire Council lawyers and the Ballarat Registry hassome
nice get together over the phone without that I am a party to it, in fact left unbeknowen to it all
together.
.
Actually in the Colosimo case I exposed this kind of rot eventuating in phone calls and orders
were issued without any formal application made, as representing Mr Colosimo I simply received
orders with no knowledge as to any application made let alone upon what grounds.
There can be absolutely no doubt that in my writings I indicated the problems with my hearing
aids, (remains unresolved) but as the court Registrar didnt respond to me and did indicate the
parking facilities then I was left to that the hearing would proceed. As such, I view the conduct of
the Registry was appalling as for who I know the hearing may not have proceeded for other
reasons discussed between the Ballarat Registry and Alison May but the Registry then used my
writings as to make it that I had made the application and therefore failed to advise me of it.
While the option of having His Honour to be disqualified from continuing the hearing is there, I
am however well aware that unlikely will that achieve anything, because it seems to me evidently
clear that the legal processes are so to say up the creek.
It was often mentioned that I held the unofficial record to have judges disqualified (over the
decades) but I found very often that you only get off worse subsequently. Still I did as I held
appropriate, and well ended up with a reputation that a judge even commenced to say he knew I
was after him to be disqualified, merely at the time I walked into a court room, without any
justification to state so.
Considering the above I make it clear that I do not hold that His Honour on 17 may 23016
deliberately sought to undermine my case, and indeed was very courteous in his conduct I view
many judges could learn from, but it is his decisions that I view were not correct in law. Neither
can I anticipate any other judge to do better because so to say it is embedded in the legal system.

p15
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 16
I can conclude that despite all my writings, including the Chief Justice, Attorney-General,
Premier and others I cannot see the system can be improved unless a person like myself is put in
charge and iron out it all.
I can reasonable expect people disillusioned with the legal system may in the end seek to resolve
their disputes outside the legal processes as they deem fit as they expect that the legal system
isnt working adequately.
As I indicated the court is willing to issue orders in regard to over $225,000 in the Abbott case,
where his Affidavit that I understand was filed too late then resulted to orders, this even so now
10 years later GBE itself admits he never had any debt to them. Here we had a court deceive d by
lawyers to a huge amount and yet the court does nothing about it, and as such basically as I view
it may be perceive to sanctioned corruption or other unlawful conduct.
Hence, the decisions on 17 May 2016 may be perceived by many that the court simply is a total
failure to provide JUSTICE.

Gerrit
Constitutionalist & Consultant
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL
Mr. G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B., GUARDIAN
(OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN)
107 Graham Road, Viewbank, 3084, Victoria, Australia
Ph (International) 61394577209
.
Email; inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au
The content of this email and any attachments are provided WITHOUT PREJUDICE, unless
specifically otherwise stated.
If you find any typing/grammatical errors then I know you read it, all you now need to do is to
consider the content appropriately!
A FOOL IS A PERSON WHO DOESN'T ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE OF BEING
CONCERNED TO BE LABELLED A FOOL.

From: Jim <jim.sovereign@optusnet.com.au>


To: Gerrit H. <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au>
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2016, 0:43
Subject: Re: Monday 10.00 am 30 May 2016 at Melbourne County Court of Victoria
Gerrit,
After all the general court and judge "bashing" you have been doing since last year in
your writing, I was surprised to read of your respect for this particular judge. He must be in
the minority group of judges who are honourable and competent in their work.
What I don't quite understand is what type of hearing you had if it wasn't a special hearing
to determine your "objection to jurisdiction," and it wasn't the hearing of the appeal. You
wrote, "The fact that he gave me ample of time, and boy did he, to present my arguments
p16
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 17
showed he did consider matters." I thought all your arguments and issues were outlined in
your "address to the court" and numerous letters. Were you presenting an oral summary of
what you had written in your corresspondence? If so, what is the point of writing a
comprehensive "address to the court" if you are going to basically repeat its contents in an
oral submission, particularly when someone like you has a hearing disability?
I obviously did not witness your hearing however it seems to me the judge you exchanged
views with as you put it, basically dismissed your objection to jurisdiction without proof of
his presumption of jurisdiction, and from your manner of writing it appears that
you conceded to his decision and explanation.
You wrote, "... view what His Honour stated he did provide for justice, regardless I may not
have liked the decisions as such." I do not understand how you can perceive that you
received justice, or justice was provided for when you disliked and/or disagreed with his
decisions. The definition of justice includes many nuances but from reading and interpreting
your description, I do not think you received fair justice at that hearing.
It seems to me there are still many unresolved issues and points which I assume you will
pursue during your appeal on 30 May. I wish you success in your appeal and hope you will
be heard by an honourable and competent judge.
Jim

----- Original Message ----From: Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.


To: Jim
Cc: Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 10:06 PM
Subject: Monday 10.00 am 30 May 2016 at Melbourne County Court of Victoria
Jim,
when I walked in to the court room staff themselves immediately addressed me by my
surname. Perhaps from my photo on their dartboards? :)
The matter was adjournment back to Melbourne for 30 May at 10.00 am in the County Court
of Victoria for the hearing of the appeal.
If I am correct before His Honour Judge Carmody (associate Sarah Gall).
the witness Mr Wayne Wall didn't turn up. However, I pursued the issue of the lawyers
of Buloke Shire Council not to have any legal standing but His Honour didn't accept this.
I pursued the OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION but His Honour didn't accept this.
I pursued the failure to serve documents, etc, but His Honour didn't accept this.
Despite that His honour made those rulings I view he nevertheless was one of the best
judges I ever came before. I may not agree with the rulings but at the end of the day he is
the judge and make the decisions. The fact that he gave me ample of time, and boy did he,
to present my arguments showed he did consider matters. The fact that His Honour made
his decisions which I hoped he wouldn't do as such doesn't mean he was seeking to
undermine my case. Merely that he explained why he took certain decisions. As such from
his position he held he made the right decisions. His Honour did make clear that when a
party fails to comply with rules/regulation he often goes behind it and doesn't just then go
against this party.
p17
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 18
While there was a mountain of reasons that I view His Honour ought to have so to say
thrown the opponent's case out of the window, it comes down to that as a judge he can and
does make the decision and from his explanation it didn't seem unreasonable even so I may
not like it.
I have been long enough at the bar table that a judge may rule on his views and consider
the facts and well this is why he is the judge.
I said ample and he gave me plenty of leverage to do so albeit in the end he made his
decisions.
In no way did I have the impression that His Honour sought to intimidate me or otherwise
rob me of rights, indeed even during the hearing His Honour sought to accommodate me
about my hearing problems, etc. It is not about winning or losing a case, but about justice.
And I view that in view what His Honour stated he did provide for justice, regardless I may
not have liked the decisions as such.
Another judge may have ruled in my favour but again in the end a judge makes his ruling
upon what he considers and it is his right to do so.
Now the case itself will be in issue.
At no time did in any way His Honour show any kind of disrespect towards me to the
contrary there was an exchange of views.
I have never been to attack the credibility of a judge merely as to having made an
adverse decision having appropriately considered all relevant details, as that is what a judge
is entitled to do.
It now will be for the Appeal hearing itself.
Gerrit
Constitutionalist & Consultant
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL
Mr. G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B., GUARDIAN
(OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN)
107 Graham Road, Viewbank, 3084, Victoria, Australia
Ph (International) 61394577209
.
Email; inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au
The content of this email and any attachments are provided WITHOUT PREJUDICE, unless
specifically otherwise stated.
If you find any typing/grammatical errors then I know you read it, all you now need to do is
to consider the content appropriately!
A FOOL IS A PERSON WHO DOESN'T ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE OF BEING CONCERNED
TO BE LABELLED A FOOL.

p18
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 19
From: Jim < jim.sovereign@optusnet.com.au>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 17 May 2016, 13:44
Subject: Re: see attachment 20160516-Schorel-Hlavka to Assoc. to Her Honour Hannan J CCVRe APPEAL-15-2502-Disorganisation URGENT
Gerrit,
It seems that the more you criticise and complain about the County court and some of its
incompetent staff, the more arduous they make your case. The court staff appear to dislike
you and are hoping they can break you before you leave their warm hospitality.
As it currently stands all your complaining about the County court and its incompetence at
proper compliance with legal process doesn't seem to be changing anything in your favour. I
suppose they could always make life harder for you if you don't back off to some extent.
Jim

----- Original Message ----From: Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.


To: Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 12:30 PM
Subject: Fw: see attachment 20160516-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Assoc. to Her Honour
Hannan J CCV-Re. APPEAL-15-2502-Disorganisation URGENT
Has the court an IQ less than that of a child, I wonder?
The document can be downloaded from:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/312711306/20160516-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-to-Assoc-toHer-Honour-Hannan-J-CCV-Re-APPEAL-15-2502-DisorganisationURGENT

Gerrit
Constitutionalist & Consultant
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL
Mr. G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B., GUARDIAN
(OFFICE-OF-THE-GUARDIAN)
107 Graham Road, Viewbank, 3084, Victoria, Australia
Ph (International) 61394577209
.
Email; inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au
The content of this email and any attachments are provided WITHOUT PREJUDICE, unless
specifically otherwise stated.
If you find any typing/grammatical errors then I know you read it, all you now need to do is
to consider the content appropriately!
A FOOL IS A PERSON WHO DOESN'T ASK THE QUESTION BECAUSE OF BEING CONCERNED
TO BE LABELLED A FOOL.
p19
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 20
----- Forwarded Message ----From: Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. < admin@inspector-rikati.com>
To: judgehannan.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Cc: admin@inspector-rikati.com; feedback@countycourt.vic.gov.au;
buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au; daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au;
martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au; attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au;
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au; crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au;
registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au; judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016, 12:26
Subject: see attachment 20160516-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Assoc. to Her Honour Hannan
J CCV-Re. APPEAL-15-2502-Disorganisation URGENT
Associate to Her Honour Hannan J.
2016
judgehannan.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au

16-5-

Cc: Mr Peter Kidd CJ County Court of Victoria, feedback@countycourt.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, attorneygeneral@justice.vic.gov.au
Elliott Stafford and Associated lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
County Court of Victoria crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au
The Registrar , registry.ballarat@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Mr Garry McIntosh, Associate to His Honour Mullaly J.
judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Re: 20160516-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Assoc to His Honour Hannan J CCV-Re APPEAL-152502-Disorganisation-URGENT


Madam,
see attachment 20160516-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Assoc to Her Honour Hannan J CCV-Re
APPEAL-15-2502-DisorganisationURGENT
-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL107 Graham
RoadViewbank 3084, Victoria, AustraliaAuthor of INSPECTOR-RIKATI books on certain
constitutional and other legal issues.THE MORAL OF A SOCIETY CAN BE MEASURED BY
HOW IT PROVIDES FOR THE DISABLED
END QUOTE 18-5-2016 EMAIL

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!)

p20
11-5-2016
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, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Похожие интересы