The Court refused an extension of time and dismissed an application for leave to appeal a VCAT interlocutory order that had partially refused leave to amend particulars of claim in a discrimination proceeding. The Court held that a 73-day delay was significant and unexplained, that the self-represented applicant's legal qualifications (including a law doctorate and prior admission to practice) reduced the weight to be given to self-representation as a mitigating factor, and that the appeal had no real prospect of success because the VCAT Senior Member's exercise of discretion on a matter of practice and procedure disclosed no apparent legal error. The Court also observed that the protracted procedural history — four appeals in under three years without the substantive claim advancing beyond the pleading stage — weighed against the exercise of residual discretion to grant leave.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.