1

Elliott Stafford and Associated

lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
Cc:

10

7-12-2015

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

Mr Wayne Wall & 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; 20151207-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- Re APPEAL-15-2502-Re Meaning of fire danger-etc

Sir/Madam,

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

while it is not for me to educate you about the meaning and application of legislative
provisions, obviously, where the legislation requires the opinion of the Municipal Fire Protection
Officer then it is so to say fair game to question him about his training, etc. Also, on what basis is
100mm be deemed not to be a fire danger? After all, fire doesnt discriminate between grass/weed
being 99mm or 101 mm. Indeed, a property could have grass/weed in some areas being 30 or more mm
high and yet form no fire danger, because of the location of it whereas grass/weed of even 50 mm, yet
may be a danger to being a fire hazard where motor vehicles were to move onto it with hot exhaust
systems on the soft should of the road. Indeed, so in particular where the grass/weed is slashed, and left
there drying out being even a more danger as a fire hazard. While Mr Wayne Wall may be the Municipal
Fire Prevention Officer much will go to what training, if any, he had to be able to competently assess if
certain areas are or are not fire dangers. The mere fact that down the road he allowed weed/grass to grow
more than a metre high on the soft shoulder of the road legitimately places in question if he is competent
enough to form the opinion as required by the Country Fire Authority Act 1958. One also can question
his competence where the Fire Prevention Notice demands that removal of all combustible material from
the land which effectively means all wooden fence poles, wooden railings, etc. One cannot argue that
common sense should prevail as to the fence poles while not allowing common sense to prevail with
if grass/weed is a fire danger or not. It must be clear that the legislation doesnt provide for the common
sense opinion of the land holder, but that of the opinion of the Municipal Fire Protection Officer.
Therefore his competence or the lack thereof to form a proper opinion would be fundamental to any
litigation. As such, any evidence that can question his competence of forming an opinion appropriate
to the legal requirements of the law is essential to any litigation. Where the soft should of the road shows
growth (weed/grass) of 150 mm or more then if this is indicative to not being deemed a fire danger by
the Municipal Fire Prevention Officer because it is a small portion of the soft shoulder then likewise any
land holder can use this as being applicable likewise to his/her property. The foremost issue therefore is
for the Prosecutor to prove (that is even for a jurisdictional issue) that the Municipal Fire Prevention
Officer was able to competently form an opinion and that the height of 100 millimetres in fact was a
justifiable requirement in the circumstances. The court may very well conclude that the 100 millimetres is
not what is specified in the Country Fire Authority Act 1958, and so is something that the Municipal Fire
Prevention Officer has made up without any evidence that this particular height and not 99 mm, 101 mm,
or whatever, is critical to be considered a fire danger hazard, hence for this the Fire Prevention Order for
this also fails to be valid in law and so any litigation based upon it. Being a criminal offence issue then
mens rea comes also into place, if a person without intend may be deemed to have violated legislative
provisions, such as contractors failing to properly clear the soft shoulders of highways.

This document is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all details/issues.
Awaiting your response,

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

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL (Our name is our motto!)

p1
7-12-2015
Mr 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: E-mail admin@inspector-rikati.com See also blog Http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati