Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Pathmanathan v St John of God Healthcare Inc (No 2) [2021] FCA 928 File number(s): VID 781 of 2018
Judgment of: KERR J
Date of judgment: 6 August 2021
Date of publication of reasons: 9 August 2021
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory applications by applicant that she have leave to attend and conduct the substantive hearing of her application remotely via videoconference – applicant's interlocutory applications dismissed
Legislation: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)
Cases cited: Pathmanathan v St John of God Healthcare Inc [2019] FCA 1460
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs: 38
Date of hearing: 4 August 2021
Date of last submissions: 6 August 2021
Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Pennington
Solicitor for the Respondent: HWL Ebsworth Lawyers
ORDERS VID 781 of 2018
BETWEEN: AJINTHA PATHMANATHAN Applicant
AND: ST JOHN OF GOD HEALTHCARE INC Respondent
order made by: KERR J DATE OF ORDER: 6 aUGUST 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Applicant's interlocutory application of 30 July 2021 be dismissed. 2. The Applicant's interlocutory application of 6 August 2021 be dismissed. 3. The trial dates of 30 August 2021 to 3 September 2021 be vacated. 4. The proceeding be listed for a case management hearing on a date to be advised. 5. Subject to Order 6, the costs of both the interlocutory applications be the Respondent's costs in the cause. 6. If either party wishes to submit for an alternative order to Order 5, they may file and serve written submissions limited to no more than 2 pages within 7 days of the publication of these reasons. The opposing party may file and serve any responsive submissions limited to no more than 2 pages within 7 days of service upon it or her. 7. Any application made pursuant to Order 6 will be heard and determined on the papers. 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