That evening he discussed the matter with Ronaldo Villanie a member of the Freedom Collective organising committee, and they resolve to nevertheless hold a protest on the footpath opposite Hindmarshy Park. By their calculations, 500m line from SemSyth runs through the gutter of the verge - placing the footpath beyond the restrictions of the regulations. They disseminate this plan throughout their network.

 

The following day, on the 17th of June, several hundred protesters converged on the footpath opposite Hindmarshy Park, to protest against the Public Health Regulations. The protesters carried placards and signs, and many of them flew the Red Ensign. The protest was heavily policed, with mounted police patrolling the road.

 

About half an hour into the protest, an ABC news crew started filming the protest from within Hindmarshy Park. At this point, Ronaldo ran onto the road with his sign and started performatively protesting directly in front of the camera, chanting "No Vaxx; No Tax" while waving his placard. Within a minute he was surrounded by police, and removed from the vicinity.

 

Ronaldo was subsequently served an expiation notice for violating s26 of the Pandemic Preparedness (Public Health Measures) Act 2023 (Cth). He was subsequently subject to an enforcement orders made by the Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

 

Ronaldo sought to challenge the orders in that Court under s 14(1) of the Expiation of Offences Act 2016 (Cth). The matter is set down for hearing before Judge Novelle on 1st of July.

 

The hearing gets off to an acrimonious start when Ronaldo, Dr Aevyl and members of the Freedom Collective in attendance first refused to stand as Judge Novelle enters the court room, then turn around to present her their backs. When order is returned, Judge Novelle calls on the applicant observing that 'this must be the notorious and well named Mr Villanie'. She continued:

 

'In the last 18months I have heard over a dozen matters brough by self-proclaimed Sovereign Citizens. Not one of these matters has had the barest hint of a coherent argument, and all have been duly dismissed. I am telling you now that no more of this court's time will be wasted on frivolous claims. You had better have a good case to present.'

 

Ronaldo begins his submissions with arguments about why the court is not properly constituted because the wrong coat of arms was displayed. After two minutes of ranting, Judge Novelle cut him off saying 'we all seem to be well named this morning, as you are inviting me to do something novel in the extreme! Do you have any legally relevant submission to make?'

 

Judge Novelle warned him that if he did not confine himself to legally relevant materials he would be prohibited from making further submissions. Ronaldo shot back that this interjection was 'proof of the conspiracy against freedom that necessitated the protest', and that he had a 'God given and constitutionally protected right to protest as he wished.' He then stated that he had evidence indicating that he was being victimised by the police who were hovering next to him looking for the slightest misconduct.

 

At that point Judge Novelle stopped Ronaldo speaking and stated that she did not wish to hear outlandish claims of victimisation. The Judge confirmed the orders of the Registrar under s 14(4)(a), and ordered that Ronaldo pay both costs and a penalty of $1500 for bringing a frivolous claim and wasting the court's time.

 

 

Ronaldo wishes to challenge the decision of Judge Novelle to uphold the expiation, and to impose the additional orders.

 

Please advise Ronaldo as to the appropriate methods of review available to him, and the prospects of success of any application.