FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Rojas v Esselte Australia Pty Limited [2007] FCA 1478 DAVID ROJAS v ESSELTE AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED NSD 1875 OF 2007 ALLSOP J 17 SEPTEMBER 2007 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1875 OF 2007 BETWEEN: DAVID ROJAS Applicant AND: ESSELTE AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED Respondent JUDGE: ALLSOP J DATE OF ORDER: 17 SEPTEMBER 2007 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Leave be granted to file the application and supporting affidavits of Mark Cochrane and David Rojas in Court. 2. The time by which the application, the affidavits of Messrs Rojas and Cochrane and a copy of these orders is to be served be abridged to 11.00 am on 18 September 2007. 3. The matter be listed for directions and for hearing of any interlocutory application before Allsop J at 10.15 am on 21 September 2007. 4. Liberty to apply on 24 hours' notice. 5. On or before 10.00 am on 20 September 2007, the applicant serve on the respondent or any solicitors for the respondent, short outline submissions identifying the basis for any claim for interlocutory relief, including the facts and inferences said to arise in the circumstances to support the relief. Such submissions to be no longer than 3 pages. 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 1875 OF 2007 BETWEEN: DAVID ROJAS Applicant AND: ESSELTE AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED Respondent JUDGE: ALLSOP J DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2007 PLACE: SYDNEY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 In this matter short service is sought on an application for relief under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) and the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) in relation to the dismissal of the applicant from the respondent's employment last Wednesday, 12 September 2007. 2 The application, through the relief claimed, impliedly asserts that there has been a dismissal for reasons which are reasons not contemplated as lawful by the Workplace Relations Act. There are two affidavits filed, one of the applicant and one of Mark Cochrane, an organiser with the National Union of Workers, New South Wales branch. Counsel informs me that these are the affidavits upon which reliance will be placed at any interlocutory hearing. The claim for interlocutory relief is, in effect, for reinstatement pending the resolution of the matter. 3 I am prepared to bring this matter back with a degree of urgency by reason of the circumstances in [23] of the applicant's affidavit. Though short, I accept at this level of generality that the steps taken by the respondent endanger the livelihood and the capacity of the applicant to support himself and his wife. Whether or not ultimately on Friday in the presence of the respondent the application for interim relief goes ahead is a matter on which I will hear the parties on Friday. 4 For the moment I am prepared to grant short service and I make the following orders: (1) Leave be granted to file the application and supporting affidavits of Mark Cochrane and David Rojas in Court. (2) The time by which the application, the affidavits of Messrs Rojas and Cochrane and a copy of these orders is to be served be abridged to 11.00 am on 18 September 2007. (3) The matter be listed for directions and for hearing of any interlocutory application before Allsop J at 10.15 am on 21 September 2007. (4) Liberty to apply on 24 hours' notice. (6) On or before 10.00 am on 20 September 2007, the applicant serve on the respondent or any solicitors for the respondent, short outline submissions identifying the basis for any claim for interlocutory relief, including the facts and inferences said to arise in the circumstances to support the relief. Such submissions to be no longer than 3 pages. I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop. Associate: Dated: 20 September 2007 Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Joseph Solicitor for the Applicant: Slater and Gordon Date of Hearing: 17 September 2007 Date of Judgment: 17 September 2007