Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bellou v Victoria University (No 3) [2019] FCA 940 File number: VID1053 of 2017
Judge: SNADEN J
Date of judgment: 13 June 2019
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for stay or dismissal of trial due to non-compliance with court orders – application for vacation of trial due to health reasons – medical evidence – whether costs should be awarded – trial dates vacated with conditions – applications otherwise dismissed.
Legislation: Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) ss 342, 570 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 17
Cases cited: Bellou v Victoria University [2018] FCA 1794 Bellou v Victoria University [2019] FCA 812 DKX17 v Federal Circuit Court of Australia [2019] FCAFC 10 Lamont v University of Queensland (No 1) [2019] FCA 897
Date of hearing: 13 June 2019
Registry: Victoria
Division: Fair Work Division
National Practice Area: Employment & Industrial Relations
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 21
Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr N.A.T. Harrington
Solicitor for the Respondent: DLA Piper
ORDERS VID1053 of 2017
BETWEEN: THEA BELLOU Applicant
AND: VICTORIA UNIVERSITY Respondent
JUDGE: SNADEN J DATE OF ORDER: 13 JUNE 2019
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Order 9 of the orders made herein on 29 May 2019—and the hearing dates that were, thereby, set for the trial of this proceeding—be vacated. 2. The matter be listed for a case management hearing at 10:15am on Friday, 13 December 2019. 3. On, or within three business days either side of, each of: a. Friday, 9 August 2019; b. Friday, 11 October 2019; and c. Friday, 6 December 2019, the applicant file and serve evidence concerning: (i) the status or state of her medical condition at that time; (i) her fitness at that time to resume her preparations for and/or engagement in the proceeding (including, in particular, by way of the filing of the evidence upon which she intends to rely at trial); and (ii) in the event that the evidence provided in compliance with (ii) above is to the effect that she remains, at that time, unfit to so resume, the timeframe within which it is then expected that she will be able to do so. 4. On or before Thursday, 20 June 2019, the applicant serve, either personally or by ordinary pre-paid mail, a copy of these orders upon Dr Anthony Diamantaras of Moonee Ponds Medical Clinic. 5. The applicant's interlocutory application dated 12 June 2019 be otherwise dismissed, with no order as to costs. 6. The costs of and relating to the respondent's interlocutory application of 7 June 2019 be reserved for resolution at the time that the court publishes reasons for these orders. 7. The respondent's interlocutory application of 7 June 2019 be otherwise dismissed. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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