Sheikholeslami v Brungs [2006] FCA 933

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sheikholeslami v Brungs [2006] FCA 933 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to dismiss applicant's claim –power of the Court to control its proceedings to prevent abuse of process - applicant in default of Court orders – applicant's response to subpoena oppressive – no specifics of claim provided – indemnity costs Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 46PO Federal Court Rules O 35A r 3(1) Lenijamar Pty Ltd v AGC (Advances) Ltd (1990) 27 FCR 388 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378 Wu v Avin Operations Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 36 Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1718 Brown v Zomba Music Publishers Australia Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 324 ROYA SHEIKHOLESLAMI v MICHAEL BRUNGS AND UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES NSD 757 OF 2005 TAMBERLIN J SYDNEY 28 JULY 2006 IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 757 OF 2005

BETWEEN: ROYA SHEIKHOLESLAMI

APPLICANT

AND: MICHAEL BRUNGS

FIRST RESPONDENT

UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J

DATE OF ORDER: 28 JULY 2006

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The respondents' Motion to dismiss the applicant's claim is granted and the proceeding is dismissed. 2. The applicant is to pay the costs of the respondent in the main proceedings on a solicitor-client basis. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 757 OF 2005

BETWEEN: ROYA SHEIKHOLESLAMI

APPLICANT

AND: MICHAEL BRUNGS

FIRST RESPONDENT

UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J