Haire v WorkCo Australia Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 668

Haire v WorkCo Australia Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 668

Because the applicant did not know a physical address for Ms Klimen, Filecoin's workforce was highly mobile and remote, formal Hague Convention service in the United States would be unduly cumbersome and likely to delay the proceeding, and the amended documents had been brought to the attention of Ms Klimen and Filecoin through communications with Filecoin's inhouse counsel, the requirements for deemed service under r 10.48 were satisfied. For the same reasons, service of further documents in the manner required by the Rules was not practicable and email substituted service under r 10.24 was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Fair Work Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / Amended Interlocutory Application for Deemed Service Under R 10.48 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth), or Alternatively Substituted Service Under R 10.24
Outcome
Application granted in relation to deemed service and substituted service on the third and fourth respondents; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['service Outside Australia' 'deemed Service' 'substituted Service' 'hague Convention Service' 'fair Work Adverse Action']
['practice and Procedure' 'employment and Industrial Relations'] ['service Outside Australia' 'deemed Service' 'substituted Service' 'hague Convention Service' 'fair Work Adverse Action']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Fair Work Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth) / Amended Interlocutory Application for Deemed Service Under R 10.48 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth), or Alternatively Substituted Service Under R 10.24

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was practicable to serve the relevant documents on the third and fourth respondents outside Australia in accordance with the Hague Convention or the law of the United States.' 'Whether there was evidence that the relevant documents had been brought to the attention of the third and fourth respondents for the purposes of r 10.48.' 'Whether substituted service of additional documents by email should be ordered under r 10.24.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant did not know a physical address for Ms Klimen, Filecoin's workforce was highly mobile and remote, formal Hague Convention service in the United States would be unduly cumbersome and likely to delay the proceeding, and the amended documents had been brought to the attention of Ms Klimen and Filecoin through communications with Filecoin's inhouse counsel, the requirements for deemed service under r 10.48 were satisfied. For the same reasons, service of further documents in the manner required by the Rules was not practicable and email substituted service under r 10.24 was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application granted in relation to deemed service and substituted service on the third and fourth respondents; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["Pursuant to r 10.48 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the amended originating application dated 13 March 2024, amended statement of claim dated 13 March 2024 and applicant's genuine steps statement dated 13 March 2024 are taken to have been served on each of the third and fourth respondents on 14 June 2024."...