Zirk-Sadowski v University of New South Wales [2023] FCA 805

Zirk-Sadowski v University of New South Wales [2023] FCA 805

In the absence of a formal statement of claim filed and served in accordance with the Federal Court Rules, the respondents were not required to file a defence, and default judgment procedures were not enlivened. The applicant's originating application and concise statement did not satisfy the requirements to trigger a defence requirement or entitle the applicant to default judgment.

Parties
Applicant: Dr Jan Zirk-Sadowski; First Respondent: Fair Work Commission; Second Respondent: University of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Originating Application for Relief Under S 39 B(1 A)(c) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) / Interlocutory Application for Default Judgment
Outcome
Application for default judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Filing Requirements, Case Management
Practice and Procedure Default Judgment Filing Requirements Case Management

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Jan Zirk-Sadowski

Applicant

Fair Work Commission

First Respondent

University of New South Wales

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Application for Relief Under S 39 B(1 A)(c) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) / Interlocutory Application for Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents were required to file a defence absent a statement of claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to default judgment when only an originating application and concise statement were filed

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of a formal statement of claim filed and served in accordance with the Federal Court Rules, the respondents were not required to file a defence, and default judgment procedures were not enlivened. The applicant's originating application and concise statement did not satisfy the requirements to trigger a defence requirement or entitle the applicant to default judgment.

Court Disposition

Application for default judgment dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's interlocutory application for default judgment pursuant to r 5.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) be dismissed.
  • The applicant be granted leave to file and serve on the respondents an amended originating application by 4.00pm on 29 June 2023.