Ratepayers, however, will be forced to foot a legal bill expected to top $150,000 after the council failed in its bid to have the Supreme Court, rather than the Victorian Civil and Administrative Trbunal (VCAT) settle a dispute over the centre’s leasing arrangements.
The court last week ruled that VCAT was the best authority to hear the dispute over the St Albans premises. Adate for the VCAT hearing has not yet been set.
The council had been trying to evict the centre’s committee of management since last May, after it accused it of breaching guidelines for the operation of community facilities in Brimbank.
The committee of management in turn was granted an injunction by VCAT preventing the council from evicting them. The council had gone to the Supreme Court to have the injunction lifted.
The council a five-year lease with the committee, which will expire in 2009.
The council sought to evict its tenants, accusing the centre of operating as a business, as it charged service fees to the community.
Other allegations made against the committee by the council included: Failure to present a membership list, failure to present an occupational halth and safety policy, failure to inform the council of the appointment of a public officer, failure to undergo police checks and unspecified financial irregularities.
Continued on Page 3.From Page 1
Although VCAT had set a date for the dispute to be heard, the council believed it did not fall under thetribunal’s jurisdiction and sought an injunction to have the matter dealt with in the Supreme Court.
The council hired a QC and barrister and solicitors to act for it.
“We’re extremely pleased with the result and it has been a long time coming,” Westvale chairman Robert Mammarella told Star. “We hope that we can get some joy when it goes back to VCAT but our legal people have told us that we should win that one as well.
“We maintained all along that it (seeking eviction) has been a political witch-hunt, which has cost the ratepayers of Brimbank a lot of money, has caused the closure of a childcare centre and has also cost 10 people their jobs,” he said.
The council remained declined to comment last week about the judgment, apart from issuing a statement that said it hoped that the matter would be resolved quickly.
Mr Mammarella maintained that the grounds for the eviction were a “furphy.” He claimed that the council wanted to sell the centre and adjacent vegetable garden to make way for low-rise, high-density apartments.
The centre was last year rocked by the finding of more than 4000 pornographic images of young girls, some of which were believed to be under age, on a computer that was used for classes at the centre.
Mr Mammarella notified detectives after a technician discovered the images during an upgrade of the centre’s computer systems.
“It was just a political witch-hunt by the council, and they tried to kick us out when we blew the whistle on the pornography that we found there,” Mr Mammarella said.
A date for the VCAT hearing has not been set.
