Court Case: John Collins V Parviz Deaf

1. BRIEF INFORMATION:

Court Attended: Ringwood Magistrate Court (39 Ringwood St, Ringwood VIC 3134)

Incident Date: 30th May 2014

Incident Place: 34 Bellevue Avenue, Doncaster East Vic 3109

Case Hearing date: 19-08-2015 @ 9:30 a.m.

Parties Name: John Collins v Parviz Kamal

Magistrate: McNamara

Prosecutor: Kellie Christie

Proceeding Observed: Committal Proceeding

Court Room: 2

2. OVERVIEW OF THE CASE:

The case was a criminal matter (Neighbourhood Dispute).

Material facts of the case: Dispute between neighbours over written sentence on the car windscreen.

It was a contestant hearing. Defendant pleads not guilty. Purpose of the proceeding to resolve the matter.

The matter (Case) was a criminal matter and

Defendant used unlawful language for Plaintiff.

3. Defendant refused to leave the residential property of Plaintiff.

Ms. John Collins (Plaintiff) & Parviz Kamal (Defendant) are neighbours. John Collins wrote some sentence on defendant friend’s car windscreen “Move your car ASAP” which was parked in front of plaintiff house. Defendant had an argument with plaintiff why she did that but instead of getting answer somehow he involved in the dispute at the level that he assault and injured plaintiff. s17 (1)(b) & s17 (2) of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic), Act and section was breached.

The issue in dispute is mainly plaintiff was assaulted and injured by defendant.

Plaintiff had more evidence than defendant who was actually present at the incident place where it all happens.

Mr. Anthony Haward (the builder who was doing work at Plaintiff property on the day of incident)

Police constable Sarah Farmer who arrived at the incident point with her two colleges after calling on 000. She actually saw the injury Plaintiff had.

Plaintiff also gave the medical report issued by Medical centre for the injury she had during the assault.

The evidence from defendant side was not strong enough because he accepts the unlawful language used by

He adjourned the court and came back after 15 minutes to gave decision.

6. Final result

The case starts at 10:00 a.m. in morning and run till 3:30 p.m.

The dispute issued was decided on the facts presented by Plaintiff and defendant. The charges for assaulting and refusal to leave the property was proved with evidence presented and even when police arrived at the incident spot , the defendant was present at the property.

The final order made against the defendant and he was ordered to pay a fine of $800, which includes $300 for refusal to leave the plaintiff property after requesting and $500 for assaulting her. The fine, which will payable by him, will go to charity. He was also ordered to sign a bond of good character certificate, which will be valid for 12 months. In those 12 months if anyone complaint against the defendant than there will is another hearing on 18 August 2016.

Defendant loses his case because of the lack of evidence. The evidence he presented even he accepts that he used unlawful language for the plaintiff. But he refused to accept the injury incidence he