Sullivan v North West Crewing Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1130

Sullivan v North West Crewing Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1130

The material filed by Mr Sullivan did not disclose a discernible cause of action referable to s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), was unsupported by proper pleadings or evidence, gave the first respondent no proper basis on which to meet the claims, and showed no reasonable prospect of success. The proceeding also appeared to re-litigate issues already determined adversely to Mr Sullivan in the Fair Work Commission, amounting to an abuse of process. Because Mr Sullivan was self-represented and had raised undeveloped issues about the applicable enterprise agreement and the relationship with the first respondent, the Court afforded one final opportunity to amend; failing that, the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Relief Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) Concerning Fair Work Commission Decisions, With First Respondent's Application for Summary Dismissal / Summary Dismissal Application; Applicant Given One Month to File a Minute of Proposed Further Amended Originating Application
Outcome
Conditional dismissal: unless within one month the applicant files a minute of proposed further amended originating application addressing the difficulties in the reasons, the originating application filed on 28 July 2016 will be dismissed with costs, to be assessed if not agreed; costs otherwise reserved.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'self Represented Litigant' 'no Reasonable Cause of Action' 'no Reasonable Prospects of Success' 'abuse of Process' 'fair Work Commission Review' 'unfair Dismissal' 'costs Under S 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)']
['industrial Law' 'employment and Industrial Relations' 'practice and Procedure' 'costs'] ['summary Dismissal' 'self Represented Litigant' 'no Reasonable Cause of Action' 'no Reasonable Prospects of Success' 'abuse of Process' 'fair Work Commission Review' 'unfair Dismissal' 'costs Under S 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (cth)']

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

Application for Relief Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) Concerning Fair Work Commission Decisions, With First Respondent's Application for Summary Dismissal / Summary Dismissal Application; Applicant Given One Month to File a Minute of Proposed Further Amended Originating Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's amended originating application disclosed a reasonable cause of action under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)" 'Whether the applicant had no reasonable prospects of successfully prosecuting the proceeding' 'Whether the proceeding was an abuse of process because it attempted to re-litigate issues already determined in Fair Work Commission proceedings' 'Whether the first respondent was entitled to costs and whether costs were constrained by s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)' 'Whether the self-represented applicant should be afforded a further opportunity to amend']

Ratio Decidendi

The material filed by Mr Sullivan did not disclose a discernible cause of action referable to s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), was unsupported by proper pleadings or evidence, gave the first respondent no proper basis on which to meet the claims, and showed no reasonable prospect of success. The proceeding also appeared to re-litigate issues already determined adversely to Mr Sullivan in the Fair Work Commission, amounting to an abuse of process. Because Mr Sullivan was self-represented and had raised undeveloped issues about the applicable enterprise agreement and the relationship with the first respondent, the Court afforded one final opportunity to amend; failing that, the...

Court Disposition

Conditional dismissal: unless within one month the applicant files a minute of proposed further amended originating application addressing the difficulties in the reasons, the originating application filed on 28 July 2016 will be dismissed with costs, to be assessed if not agreed; costs otherwise reserved.

Orders

  • ["Unless within one month the applicant files a minute of proposed further amended originating application addressing the difficulties discussed in these reasons, the applicant's originating application filed on 28 July 2016 be dismissed with costs, to be assessed if not agreed." 'Costs be reserved.']