- Council wastes $43,000 on defending their position against a $93 parking fine
- By JOY JOSHI
- 18/07/2018 Make a Comment (2)
- Contributed by: BigJoe ( 1 article in 2018 )
The Melbourne-based man was fined $93 in may 2017 for violating a road rule in Nunawading
Man contesting $93 parking fine costs council $43,000 in legal fees as judge slams him for taking the matter all the way to the Supreme Court
- A Melbourne man has been slammed by a judge for wasting the court's time
- Judge: 'He has doggedly sought to avoid prosecution in the Magistrates’ Court'
- The man was fined $93 in may 2017 for violating a road rule in Nunawading
- The legal proceedings have cost the Whitehorse Council $43,000 in total
A man has been told off by a judge for wasting the Supreme Court's time by battling a parking fine in a case that has cost a local council $43,000.
The Melbourne-based man was fined $93 in may 2017 for violating a road rule in Nunawading, Victoria where he parked his motorhome in a disabled parking bay.
Mr Andrew Crowther waited nine months for his hearing but in the end his appeal was dismissed as an attempt to abuse the judicial process, the Herald Sun reports.
He appealed to Whitehorse Council after local law officers issued him a parking ticket for having parked a heavy vehicle in a built-up area for more than an hour without permission from the council.
Mr Crowther argued the disabled parking permit on his vehicle constitutionally allowed him to park in that space.
The council ruled against Mr Crowther as it found the permit did not overrule the road rule.
Justice Zammit found his appeal to be an attempt 'to abuse the processes of the Court'
Mr Crowther then appealed to the Magistrates' Court and simultaneously raised an appeal in the Supreme Court for judicial review as he considered it to be an interpretation issue.
Supreme Court Justice Zammit said the appellant had been dodging the parking fine in a legal process that cost Whitehorse Council $43,000 in legal fees.
'The reality is that the appellant has doggedly sought to avoid his prosecution in the Magistrates’ Court by initiating civil proceedings in this Court,' Justice Zammit said.
The judge also said similar applications for judicial review have increased lately and called them 'ill-founded'.