Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Esso Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers Union (No 2) [2018] FCA 2089 File number(s): VID 115 of 2015
Judge(s): WHEELAHAN J
Date of judgment: 24 December 2018
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – non-standard discovery – categories – application to be excused from compliance with order for discovery – alleged oppression – categories reformulated – application allowed in part.
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 343, 345, 346, 348, 413, 414, 471, 545 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 20.11 Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), Schedule 1, subclauses 6.1 and 6.2(b)
Cases cited: Esso Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union (2015) 253 IR 304 Esso Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers' Union (2017) 350 ALR 404 Hearne v Street (2008) 235 CLR 125 Index Group of Companies Pty Ltd v Nolan [2002] FCA 608 Microsoft Corporation v CX Computer Pty Ltd (2002) 116 FCR 372 Mobil Oil Australia Ltd v Guina Developments Pty Ltd [1996] 2 VR 34 Purkess v Crittenden (1965) 114 CLR 164 Rochfort v Trade Practices Commission (1982) 153 CLR 134 Trade Practices Commission v CC (New South Wales) Pty Ltd (1995) 58 FCR 426
Date of hearing: 19 December 2018
Registry: Victoria
Division: Fair Work Division
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 62
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate