Perananthasivam v Telstra Corporation Limited [2007] FCA 1584

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Perananthasivam v Telstra Corporation Limited [2007] FCA 1584

LEAVE TO APPEAL – Federal Magistrates Court strikes out part of disability discrimination claim and refuses to remove solicitors from acting for respondent – whether applicant would suffer substantial injustice if leave to appeal were refused Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), ss 5, 6, 15 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 24(1)(d), 24(1A) Human rights and Equal Opportunities Commission Act 1985 (Cth), ss 46PH(1)(b), 46PO Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), s 170CE(1) Bienstein v Bienstein (2003) 195 ALR 225 Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Geelong School Supplies Pty Ltd v Dean (2006) 237 ALR 612 Rana v University of South Australia (2004) 136 FCR 344

SIVANADIAN PERANANTHASIVAM v TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED NSD 1695 of 2007

SACKVILLE J

16 OCTOBER 2007

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1695 OF 2007

BETWEEN: SIVANADIAN PERANANTHASIVAM

Applicant

AND: TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED

Respondent

JUDGE: SACKVILLE J DATE OF ORDER: 16 OCTOBER 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application for leave to appeal against Judgment No 1, Judgment No 2 and Judgment No 3 (as those terms are defined herein) be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay Telstra's costs of the application. 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 1695 OF 2007

BETWEEN: SIVANADIAN PERANANTHASIVAM

Applicant

AND: TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED

Respondent

JUDGE: SACKVILLE J

DATE: 16 OCTOBER 2007

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Applications for Leave to Appeal 1 The applicant is a former employee of the respondent ('Telstra'). Telstra terminated the applicant's employment as a Bid Manager on 19 August 2005. The current application to this Court forms part of a series of disputes between the applicant and Telstra arising out of the termination of the applicant's employment and the events leading to that termination. 2 The applicant, who is unrepresented, seeks leave to appeal from a judgment given by Driver FM on 2 August 2007: Perananthasivam v Telstra Corporation Ltd [2007] FMCA 1261 ('Judgment No 1'). In that judgment, his Honour dismissed an application by the applicant to remove Deacons, a firm of solicitors, from representing Telstra in proceedings pending before the Federal Magistrates Court. 3 Although there is only one application for leave to appeal formally before me, it is clear from the applicant's written submissions that he also seeks leave to appeal from two other judgments given by the learned Magistrate. The second of the three judgments was also given on 2 August 2007: Perananthasivam v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No 2) [2007] FMCA 1274 ('Judgment No 2'). In that judgment, his Honour ordered that the application filed by the applicant on 18 April 2007 be struck out: 'except insofar as it asserts indirect disability discrimination in relation to the performance improvement programme [in] which the applicant was required to participate in July 2004'. His Honour also made directions on 2 August 2007 listing the hearing on the remaining issues for two days, commencing on 5 December 2007. 4 The third of the three judgments was delivered on 10 August 2007: Perananthasivam v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No 3) [2007] FMCA 1378 ('Judgment No 3'). In that judgment, his Honour ordered the applicant to pay Telstra's costs and disbursements of the summary dismissal application, fixed in the amount of $10,000.