Sarikaya, David v Victorian Workcover Authority [1997] FCA 1372

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - address for service - whether a post office box can be an address for service in compliance with the Federal Court Rules - whether a post office box is "the address of a place ... at which documents in the proceeding may, during ordinary business hours, be left for the person whose address for service it is ..." for the purposes of O 7 r 6(1) of the Rules. DAVID SARIKAYA v VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY VG481 of 1997 BLACK CJ MELBOURNE 8 DECEMBER 1997

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VG481 of 1997

BETWEEN: DAVID SARIKAYA

AppELLANT

AND: VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY

Respondent

JUDGE: BLACK CJ

DATE OF ORDER: 8 DECEMBER 1997

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appellant file and serve within 7 days a notice showing an address for service in compliance with O 7 r 6(2) of the Federal Court Rules. 2. The appeal be listed for hearing during the sittings of a Full Court in Melbourne to be held in March 1998 on a date to be notified by the Victorian District Registrar. 3. Liberty be reserved to either party to apply. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VG481 of 1997

BETWEEN: DAVID SARIKAYA

AppELLANT

AND: VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY

Respondent

JUDGE: BLACK CJ

DATE: 8 DECEMBER 1997

PLACE: MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BLACK CJ: At the callover of the list of appeals for hearing during the next Full Court sittings in Melbourne, the solicitor for the respondent submitted that the present appeal should be adjourned to the next callover for two reasons. The first concerned the filing and service of appeal books, a matter that has now been resolved. The other reason was that the appellant did not, so it was argued, have an address for service which complied with the Federal Court Rules. The argument before me proceeded upon the basis (contrary to what appears in the notice of appeal) that the appellant's present address for service is a Melbourne post office box. The respondent submits that the Rules do not permit this. For reasons that are not presently relevant, the appellant does not wish to use his residential or business address as his address for service. Order 52 r 12(1) provides: "An appeal shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal which shall be in or substantially in the form numbered 55 in the First Schedule." Form 55 is a form of notice of appeal and it requires the appellant's address for service to be specified. The requirements for an address for service are contained in O 7 r 6(1), which provides: "An address for service must be the address of a place within the District for the Registry in which the originating process is filed (other than the document exchange referred to in rule 7 of this Order), at which documents in the proceedings may, during ordinary business hours, be left for the person whose address for service it is and to which documents in the proceeding may be posted for that person."